Is Our Earth FLAT and Motionless, Not a Spinning Globe?

[Aron]

@Winston
Well this thread surprised me. But yeah, the earth is not flat...
Honestly you shouldn't be so open to this idea. None of the physics of flat earth make any sense. Like how it somehow has no gravity. Gravity explains the mechanics of the universe very well. All mass in the universe attracts all other mass. Why doesn't a plane fly off the edge of the earth? Obviously it keeps getting pulled in by gravity continuously, gravity is continuously in effect. If you wanted to fly the plane straight off the earth you'd need to reach escape velocity to escape it's gravitational well. Why does the earth orbit the sun? Because of the sun's gravity constantly pulling on the earth. Which also then explains why the sun goes around the center of the galaxy and so on. It's all very consistent and fits what's observed without requiring every amateur astronomer who bought a telescope to suddenly be in on the conspiracy.

With Flat Earth you're basically just supposed to believe this Dome or whatever is magically floating for no reason. Why isn't the flat earth constantly falling at high speed, so that everyone on earth slams into the dome ceiling? Remember in flat earth there's no gravity so there's nothing keeping them attached to the ground. And the flat earth has to have a bottom at some point, what's below it? Is it turtles all the way down?

To make it easier to understand i will just put this video here. It gives a visualization of the flat earth and how it could not possibly work. One thing I noticed when it explains how spherically radiated sunlight would not just cover half the earth, is that even if it did cover half, areas like Greenland would be under sunlight 95% of the time regardless of season. Which obviously is not true.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uexZbunD7Jg
Flat Earth is basically just something people made up to justify Christianity.
Globe Earth:Earth is formed into a spheroid by gravitational forces over time, consistent with how physics work in the universe
Flat Earth:Earth is flat because....Goddunit!

[Cornfed]

With Flat Earth you're basically just supposed to believe this Dome or whatever is magically floating for no reason. Why isn't the flat earth constantly falling at high speed, so that everyone on earth slams into the dome ceiling?

Falling to where exactly? If most flat earth theories are correct, this is all there is.

[Aron]

@Cornfed

But that doesn't really make sense. It's like saying spacetime doesn't exist. Of course there would be something outside the dome, not that a dome makes sense. Even if it's just empty void with no air.

So do you believe in this flat earth idea or not?

[Cornfed]

But that doesn't really make sense. It's like saying spacetime doesn't exist. Of course there would be something outside the dome, not that a dome makes sense. Even if it's just empty void with no air.

So do you believe in this flat earth idea or not?

Of course bullcrap constructs like "spacetime" don't exist. If it makes no sense for nothing to be outside the Earth, what does conventional theory say about what is outside the universe and why the entire universe isn't perpetually falling? That would make even less sense. I have no idea whether the earth is flat, but mainstream cosmology makes no intuitive sense.

[Aron]

@Cornfed:
Technically all mass in the universe is 'falling'. All mass pulls all other mass. There's no arbitrary 'surface' it all rests on. There's no real outside to the universe either.

[Cornfed]

There's no arbitrary 'surface' it all rests on. There's no real outside to the universe either.

If that makes sense to you then the same thing should make sense with respect to the earth.

[Aron]

@Cornfed
It's more like the universe is just infinite making the idea of an outside not apply.
So....Do you believe the earth is flat or not?

[Cornfed]

It's more like the universe is just infinite making the idea of an outside not apply.

So in that case you radically disagree with mainstream cosmology.

[Aron]

@Cornfed
Does it even matter? Some scientists say spacetime may be a closed loop others say the 'size of the universe' could be explained by M-Theory. It doesn't really change anything important about gravity's consistency in explaining what we see and the validity of a spheroid earth. And i'm not going to bother trying to research all the intricacies of physics. Even back in ancient Greece scientists could figure out the earth was spherical and the data has just gotten far more vast since then due to newton. And now you avoided saying the important thing 2 times in a row, are you a flat earther or not?

[Cornfed]

The point is that you have no solution that is more satisfactory than flat earth theory. I've no idea what the truth of the matter is.

[Winston]

@Aron
I know flat earth sounds ludicrous, but a true skeptic has to be skeptical of his own beliefs too, not just of beliefs he doesn't agree with. Otherwise the word skeptic has no meaning since everyone is skeptical of what they don't believe. I can't dismiss flat earth just because it's abnormal. That's called the cult of normalcy. I gotta look at the evidence too and see if it holds water.

Flat Earth is not an excuse for Christianity, although some flat earthers are Christian. The idea is for people who badly want to unplug from the matrix, so they turn to a radical paradigm like this, because they want to escape the matrix and be different. So it's psychological in that sense.

I agree the evidence does not support flat earth. However, that doesn't mean the Earth must be a globe or sphere either. We simply don't know because there is so much hoax and trickery from NASA. Not only does NASA lie and fake things, but they killed many people too. NASA means serpent in ancient language. It even has a serpent tongue on its logo. So NASA is a deceiver, hidden in plain sight.

There are also anomalies about outer space that make no sense. Some examples:

1. There are only 2 genuine photos of the whole earth from space, taken in 1969 and 1972. If astronauts or probes could go all the way out into space to see the whole earth, there should be many thousands of real images from earth, not just 2. And even those 2 photos are suspicious and look fake. Furthermore, the photos show a perfect sphere, not a pear shape oblate shape like NASA claims the earth is now. The Apollo 8 astronauts said the earth was just a big blog from space and could not even take a decent photo or video of it.

2. If space is a complete vacuum, how can it be adjacent to air atmosphere of earth without a seal or barrier to keep the air in? Anyone knows that a vacuum will suck air out into space. No one can explain this. This suggests a dome or barrier or force field of some kind around the earth.

3. If there is no up or down in space, then how come all the images of earth from outer space show the earth right side up all the time? Why don't they show the earth upside down, with the south pole on top? Or sideways with the poles on the sides?

4. Why do no commercial aircraft ever fly across the North or South Pole or over Antarctica? Why are you not allowed to go to the North Pole, even on land by foot or by boat, even if you are willing to do so at your own risk? What is there that they don't want you to see? What are they hiding?

5. If earth is moving in orbit at 67,000 mph, which is faster than a speeding bullet, why then when astronauts are in outer space or are flying to the moon, doesn't the earth whoosh away from them like a speeding bullet, leaving them to die in space and float forever with no hope of ever catching up with the earth?

6. If Venus and Mercury and between Earth and the Sun, and the Earth at nighttime is faced AWAY from the Sun in the opposite direction, how the hell can you see Venus and Mercury at night? It should be impossible.

7. Why do they keep changing their mind about how far away the Sun is? How do they know it's 93 million miles away? It certainly doesn't look 93 million miles away when you look at it. Go look and see. The Sun rays come down at angles, like street lights do. That suggests that it's nearby, not that far away. If it was 93 million miles away, all the Sun rays would be parallel at a straight line. Also, at 93 million miles away, the tilt of the Earth should not make any big differences in temperature during the different seasons. And the Moon certainly doesn't look 237,000 miles away. If it was, you would not be able to see so much detail on it. Beyond 30 miles, detail starts to blur and fade. You shouldn't be able to see detail that far away. Furthermore, if Moon light is a reflection of Sunlight, then why is Moon light cold and white, not warm and yellow?

So you see, there are a lot of things that don't add up about space and astronomy. A lot of unanswered questions and things that doesn't make sense. This means something about our reality may be hidden from us, even if the Earth isn't flat.

@Ghost and @droid any answers to the above? lol

[Aron]

@Cornfed
So unless I have a perfect explanation of the entirety of spacetime and its mechanics then flat earth is equally valid as an explanation....You have to realize that's a strawman and that you're avoiding so many points i made in my earlier post about flat earth not logically computing.

@Winston
The first flat earthers made it up to excuse Christianity and non christian flat earthers often just use the same model they did or something 90% the same. So i don't see how what i said is that wrong. It doesn't have to be all flat earthers being Christian for Christianity to be how Flat Earth became an idea.

"I agree the evidence does not support flat earth. However, that doesn't mean the Earth must be a globe or sphere either. We simply don't know because there is so much hoax and trickery from NASA. Not only does NASA lie and fake things, but they killed many people too. NASA means serpent in ancient language. It even has a serpent tongue on its logo. So NASA is a deceiver, hidden in plain sight."

Well the globe being a spheroid kind of makes sense with gravity, as the mass pulls on other mass it is compressed more and more severely so when a whole lot of mass is together it's being compressed very uniformly from all directions making it a spheroid, unlike those asteroids which are too small mass to become spheres. People have circumnavigated the earth which is consistent with it being a sphere. Aristotle calculated the size of the earth a long time ago.

Are you sure that's a serpent tongue? I get it that you could interpret it into being a serpent tongue. But the official explanation of it doesn't seem that weird tbh.

"There are only 2 genuine photos of the whole earth from space, taken in 1969 and 1972. If astronauts or probes could go all the way out into space to see the whole earth, there should be many thousands of real images from earth, not just 2. And even those 2 photos are suspicious and look fake. Furthermore, the photos show a perfect sphere, not a pear shape oblate shape like NASA claims the earth is now. The Apollo 8 astronauts said the earth was just a big blog from space and could not even take a decent photo or video of it."

Well there is also the live stream from the ISS which is showing continuous video and you can look at hours of footage. That's about as good as it gets. That Oblate Spheroid claim comes from this big misinterpretation. Neil deGrasse Tyson's 'pear shaped' claim wasn't saying it looks like a literal pear. And the original source of that claim shows the context where he says it's very slightly oblate as a spheroid. In other words it's not perfectly uniform. But it's not to the degree where you can actually see the amount of difference from space with your eyes as if the earth looked 'fat' around the center. He said a mountain slightly below the equator is 1 and a third miles farther away from the earth than mount everest. But compared to the earth that's tiny, he makes an analogy about how you wouldn't even feel the mountains if you had hands the size of the earth and rubbed your fingers over mt everest. "Cosmically speaking, we're practically a perfect sphere"-From the same video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OeWTrEA5fE

"2. If space is a complete vacuum, how can it be adjacent to air atmosphere of earth without a seal or barrier to keep the air in? Anyone knows that a vacuum will suck air out into space. No one can explain this. This suggests a dome or barrier or force field of some kind around the earth."

There's not a barrier but people have a common misconception that there's a ton of air at one point then 5 feet later just void. It doesn't work that way. The atmosphere gradually thins out as you go farther away from the earth and the farther you go the more it looks like there is no air at all. Eventually there is a point that the international community decided to define as 'space' where the atmosphere has gotten so ridiculously thin that there is basically zero air there, but the key point here is there is no sudden jump from massive amounts of air to tiny. The air doesn't get sucked off into space because gravity exists.

3." If there is no up or down in space, then how come all the images of earth from outer space show the earth right side up all the time? Why don't they show the earth upside down, with the south pole on top? Or sideways with the poles on the sides?"
Are you sure there are none? How do you know that? And are you talking about images of the full earth or just any images of earth?

4. "Why do no commercial aircraft ever fly across the North or South Pole or over Antarctica? Why are you not allowed to go to the North Pole, even on land by foot or by boat, even if you are willing to do so at your own risk? What is there that they don't want you to see? What are they hiding?" There are aircraft that fly over Antartica for sightseeing tours.
http://www.antarcticaflights.com.au/

5. "If earth is moving in orbit at 67,000 mph, which is faster than a speeding bullet, why then when astronauts are in outer space or are flying to the moon, doesn't the earth whoosh away from them like a speeding bullet, leaving them to die in space and float forever with no hope of ever catching up with the earth?"
They're still affected by gravity from the earth just like the Moon is. Just because they're no longer trapped in the earth's atmosphere doesn't mean the earth's gravity has no effect. The earth's gravity even affects all the other planets in the solar system although not as much as Jupiter or especially the Sun for obvious reasons. So it won't just woosh past them and neither will the moon.

6. " If Venus and Mercury and between Earth and the Sun, and the Earth at nighttime is faced AWAY from the Sun in the opposite direction, how the hell can you see Venus and Mercury at night? It should be impossible."
The earth and venus don't orbit in perfect synch. But there are times when at night you wouldn't be able to see venus. Night time does not mean you are at the exact opposite side of the earth from where the sun is all the time. When that happens at around midnight then yes you would have no way to see venus. But at earlier and later times in night you could because the planet isn't totally turned away from the sun. Right after sunset, you will have a chance of seeing venus at an angle and for some time afterward depending on where venus is in its orbit. Just because you can't see the sun's light any more doesn't mean that you can't see light reflected off of venus because the point on the planet you are on hasn't rotated to where it is facing exactly opposite from the sun.

"7. Why do they keep changing their mind about how far away the Sun is? How do they know it's 93 million miles away? It certainly doesn't look 93 million miles away when you look at it. Go look and see. The Sun rays come down at angles, like street lights do. That suggests that it's nearby, not that far away. If it was 93 million miles away, all the Sun rays would be parallel at a straight line. Also, at 93 million miles away, the tilt of the Earth should not make any big differences in temperature during the different seasons. And the Moon certainly doesn't look 237,000 miles away. If it was, you would not be able to see so much detail on it. Beyond 30 miles, detail starts to blur and fade. You shouldn't be able to see detail that far away. Furthermore, if Moon light is a reflection of Sunlight, then why is Moon light cold and white, not warm and yellow? "

So what if it doesn't look 93 million miles away...Nobody's eyes are as good as telescopes.

To the intuition it seems like those kinds of rays would be coming down at an angle. But it's the same as railroad tracks converging in the distance to the eye. That might not convince you but a better proof is this picture of that effect you described coming from below the horizon:
http://www.atoptics.co.uk/atoptics/anti1.htm
Now if the sun was really close to the earth this would not fit with a flat earth since it would mean the sun is somehow below the horizon for it to produce light in that way.

Do i have to know everything about how reflected light works? It reflected off an object so maybe hitting the moon's surface changed it. Either way a globe earth makes a lot more sense than a flat earth and is more consistent with the evidence and how it would be a globe earth in the first place.

[Cornfed]

So unless I have a perfect explanation of the entirety of spacetime and its mechanics then flat earth is equally valid as an explanation....You have to realize that's a strawman and that you're avoiding so many points i made in my earlier post about flat earth not logically computing.

The point is that the particular objection you raised about the earth needing to rest on something in flat earth theory is an equally valid objection to the universe needing to rest on something in mainstream theory, so there is no reason to pick between one or the other on those grounds.

[Aron]

So unless I have a perfect explanation of the entirety of spacetime and its mechanics then flat earth is equally valid as an explanation....You have to realize that's a strawman and that you're avoiding so many points i made in my earlier post about flat earth not logically computing.

The point is that the particular objection you raised about the earth needing to rest on something in flat earth theory is an equally valid objection to the universe needing to rest on something in mainstream theory, so there is no reason to pick between one or the other on those grounds.

It's not equal. Gravity explains why matter in the universe doesn't need to 'rest on' anything. It doesn't explain the entirety of the space time continuum's mechanics but it doesn't need to.

You're just dodging points.You refuse to talk about anything but one tiny thing you nit pick that is unimportant to the conclusion that flat earth is bullshit that is proven 1000x over by every other point i made. You could've in the middle of that post also said you agree flat earth is bullshit now as i just proved but you didn't do that. Or tried to somehow defend flat earth on the other relevant points i made that nobody was able to disprove so far.Which you also didn't do.

[Cornfed]

It's not equal. Gravity explains why matter in the universe doesn't need to 'rest on' anything.

If the universe doesn’t need to rest on anything then neither does the flat earth. However, using a some hypothetical such as gravity isn’t a satisfactory explanation. It would be like saying that some god with magical powers makes things happen. Sure that explains things, but you could dream up lots of fantastical explanations. What are you proposing as a mechanism for gravity? How are things supposed to be pulled towards each other?