The Flat Earth society
- Thread starter parsifal
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
mikewint
Captain
Chris, Flatearthers would counter with "it was faked". In today's computer world of CGI effects anything goes and can be made to appear real. As I posted sometime earlier the most telling argument is the vastness of the conspiracy that would have to exist on all levels to fake the spherical shape. Not to mention the why fake it. To what end and who profits from the faking.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
It seems to me, that to some people, conspiracies are a distraction.
I know several people who are truly intelligent people and yet, they buy into chemtrails and geo-engineering.
Not sure if there's a pattern buried in there somewhere, but faked moon landings, flat-earth, alien coverups, chemtrails, FEMA camps, geo-engineering, the Hitler/JFK/Elvis cover ups and so on, seem to attract a diversity of people from all sorts of backgrounds.
I know several people who are truly intelligent people and yet, they buy into chemtrails and geo-engineering.
Not sure if there's a pattern buried in there somewhere, but faked moon landings, flat-earth, alien coverups, chemtrails, FEMA camps, geo-engineering, the Hitler/JFK/Elvis cover ups and so on, seem to attract a diversity of people from all sorts of backgrounds.
You act as devils advocate, read your own posts, it is impossible to tell whether you are putting forward actual laws of physics or those put forward by the advocates of a flat earth. I got tired of figuring out your point and bored with your boorish attitude addressing everyone else as an idiot. .
Last edited:
wuzak
Captain
Either faked, or the result of a fish-eye lens.
They also latch onto statements about images being photo-shopped "because they have to be". Neglecting the fact that the statement referred to an image made of a composite of images from a satellite in low earth orbit.
Long before all this conspiracy nonsense huge sums were spent to develop clocks that could tell the time on a ship to navigate a sphere.
wuzak
Captain
The British government set up the Board of Longitude - Wikipedia to determine a way to accurately find longitude.
I know, in any old port there was a system for a ships captain to tell the exact time, not a matter of conversation but life, death and profits.
Shortround6
Major General
I answered that back in Post #106
The "International Globe Manufacturers Confederation" or IGMC.
Their fleet of very quiet helicopters are not black, just a very dark shade of Green
wuzak
Captain
There seems to be a religious element to the flat earth movement. That is, some like to interpret the bible literally, and believe the bits in there where a flat earth is described, with a dome firmament.
In itself that is interesting, since the bible was written several hundred years after it was known that the world was round.
Is there any explanation why the centre of this imaginary disc gets dark in winter for about a month while six months later the edge gets dark in a similar fashion? The people who wrote the Bible did not concern themselves too much with what was not of great importance, for centuries it was completely unimportant whether the worlds people believed in a flat or spherical earth. When it did become important then the Church fought against science and from that we have in English the term "revolutionary theory". Eventually the Church had to accept the Earth revolves around the sun.
wuzak
Captain
The sun is close, moves between the tropics of Capricorn and Cancer during the year and has a magic shape shifting lamp shade (not their words).
Silly old me, it is obvious now I have had it explained properly.
- Thread starter
- #296
parsifal
Colonel
Of course , the variation to this argument is whether the moon missions were bogus. Further, the images that they took of the earth and the moon with spheres where these objects lie are bogus too
How Do We Know The Moon Landing Really Happened?
It just gets better and better for me.
How Do We Know The Moon Landing Really Happened?
It just gets better and better for me.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Not a religious movement, the church knew the earth was round.
Even at the time of the writings of the New Testament, the Apostles, several of whole were well educated, would have been familiar with scholars' works such as Pythagoras, Parmenides and Aristotle.
The Church as a whole, did not challenge the accepted science of the time.
Also, many of the Biblical texts FE'rs use as "proof" are taken so far out of context, there's no real way to even try and explaining the truth. One such example they use is from Daniel, about the Tree that was so tall, it could be seen from all the world - what they fail to understand, is that Daniel was writing about a DREAM that the King had confided in him for interpretation....yes, that's right, a dream.
And in the case of Columbus, there is a fable by flat-earthers that people were afraid that Columbus would sail off the edge of the earth. This is simply not true, and anyone who wishes to read his journal or other writings that involved him, would see the flat-earther's claim is not only misleading, but a bald-faced lie.
Columbus (and his contemporaries) knew that the "Indies" could be reached by sailing westward. BUT, they assumed that the voyage would take months to accomplish, as they thought the globe was much larger than it actually is. In Columbus' day, they would avoid venturing any further than 3 days sailing from land, thus a voyage to the west was thought to be sheer folly and a recipe for disaster.
All of this recent nonsense can be traced back to the 1800's, when it became almost a social fad.
- Thread starter
- #298
parsifal
Colonel
Eratosthenes was the man to first accurately estimate the circumference of the earth. Pythagoras had first theorised in approximately 500 BC that the earth was a sphere
Eratosthenes' most famous discovery is his accurate prediction of the earths circumference. He did this by comparing altitudes of the mid-day sun at two places a known North-South distance apart. His calculation was remarkably accurate. He was also the first to calculate the tilt of the earth's axis (again with remarkable accuracy). Additionally, he may have accurately calculated the distance of the earth to the sun. and invented the leap year. He created the first map of the world, incorporating parallels and meridians based on the available geographic knowledge of his era.
Contrary to common misconception, the medieval church did not teach that the earth was flat. Thomas Aquinas introduced Aristotelian thought into medieval church teaching. Writing in the fourth century BC, Aristotle clearly taught that the earth was spherical. As indicated above, In the early second century BC, Eratosthenes accurately measured the circumference of the spherical earth. Claudius Ptolemy's Almagest, from the early second century AD, provided a useful model for calculating the positions of heavenly bodies. While this model was geocentric, it did not promote a flat earth, but instead was based upon a spherical earth. The works of Aristotle, Eratosthenes, and Ptolemy were all widely available and discussed in the late medieval period, and continued to be through the transition to the Renaissance. Given the clear record of history, why is it so commonly believed today that most people, and especially the church, thought that the earth was flat?
This misconception is easily traced to the writings of two late nineteenth-century skeptics, John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White, who invented the conflict thesis. The conflict thesis holds that religion in general, and Christianity in particular, held back progress. The contention of the conflict thesis was that medieval Europe was gripped with superstition that prevented intellectual advancement, and it was only after man's reason reasserted itself during the Renaissance that man slowly became unshackled from religious dogma, bringing about the Enlightenment. It is true that four centuries ago the Roman Catholic Church opposed Galileo's teaching of the heliocentric theory. According to the conflict thesis, it was the alleged geocentric teaching of the Bible that caused the Roman Catholic Church to oppose Galileo.
However, the historical record demonstrates that it was the teachings of Aristotle and Ptolemy that played the major role in that conflict That is, the Galileo affair was a battle between two scientific theories—geocentrism and heliocentrism—with the Bible playing a very minor role. Hence, the conflict thesis reinterpreted the Galileo affair into something that it was not.
The promoters of the conflict thesis also retold the story of Christopher Columbus. Most people today persist in the belief that at the time of Columbus, nearly everyone thought that the earth was flat. According to the story, Columbus was one of the few people who thought the earth was spherical, and he understood that on a spherical earth one could sail westward from Europe to reach India and China. Supposedly, Columbus had to argue against strong objections coming from those who thought that the earth was flat to get support for his expedition. Finally, according to the story, Columbus managed to complete a voyage to the New World, and when he returned to Europe, people realized that Columbus was right—the world was round and not flat. Really? How did sailing from Europe to the Caribbean and back to Europe prove that the world was spherical? It didn't. The truth is that no one told Columbus he could not reach the Far East by sailing west. Everyone knew that it was possible, because everyone knew that the earth was spherical. The problem was that the earth was very large. Most people understood that the distance westward from Europe to the Far East was far greater than going eastward (a look at any globe proves this). The question was not how possible it was to reach Asia by going westward, but rather how feasible it was. The belief was that the ocean between Europe and Asia was vast, with little or no land in between. At the time of Columbus, voyages over open water were very risky, and ships rarely sailed more than three days out of the sight of land. A voyage westward across the ocean to Asia would have required months, with no opportunity for resupply or rescue along the way if problems developed.
The facts of history refute the commonly held story about Christopher Columbus. Much of the work supporting a flat earth today uncritically repeats and builds upon this false view. The flat earth movement began in the mid-nineteenth century, the same time that the conflict thesis was being developed. While the skeptics were ridiculing the Bible for allegedly teaching that the earth is flat, early flat-earthers foolishly accepted this false claim. Undoubtedly, the recent surge of interest in the flat earth among Christians has been fueled by the (false) belief that the Bible teaches that the earth is flat. Those who have enlisted in the flat-earth movement of late apparently are ignorant of the fact that those who promoted the conflict thesis made the same arguments to discredit the Bible. This could be ironic, or perhaps it is not. It is possible that certain people promoting the flat-earth today are doing so to discredit the Bible and Christianity all over again. If so, then Christians who have been misled into believing that the earth is flat have foolishly fallen into the trap.
Eratosthenes' most famous discovery is his accurate prediction of the earths circumference. He did this by comparing altitudes of the mid-day sun at two places a known North-South distance apart. His calculation was remarkably accurate. He was also the first to calculate the tilt of the earth's axis (again with remarkable accuracy). Additionally, he may have accurately calculated the distance of the earth to the sun. and invented the leap year. He created the first map of the world, incorporating parallels and meridians based on the available geographic knowledge of his era.
Contrary to common misconception, the medieval church did not teach that the earth was flat. Thomas Aquinas introduced Aristotelian thought into medieval church teaching. Writing in the fourth century BC, Aristotle clearly taught that the earth was spherical. As indicated above, In the early second century BC, Eratosthenes accurately measured the circumference of the spherical earth. Claudius Ptolemy's Almagest, from the early second century AD, provided a useful model for calculating the positions of heavenly bodies. While this model was geocentric, it did not promote a flat earth, but instead was based upon a spherical earth. The works of Aristotle, Eratosthenes, and Ptolemy were all widely available and discussed in the late medieval period, and continued to be through the transition to the Renaissance. Given the clear record of history, why is it so commonly believed today that most people, and especially the church, thought that the earth was flat?
This misconception is easily traced to the writings of two late nineteenth-century skeptics, John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White, who invented the conflict thesis. The conflict thesis holds that religion in general, and Christianity in particular, held back progress. The contention of the conflict thesis was that medieval Europe was gripped with superstition that prevented intellectual advancement, and it was only after man's reason reasserted itself during the Renaissance that man slowly became unshackled from religious dogma, bringing about the Enlightenment. It is true that four centuries ago the Roman Catholic Church opposed Galileo's teaching of the heliocentric theory. According to the conflict thesis, it was the alleged geocentric teaching of the Bible that caused the Roman Catholic Church to oppose Galileo.
However, the historical record demonstrates that it was the teachings of Aristotle and Ptolemy that played the major role in that conflict That is, the Galileo affair was a battle between two scientific theories—geocentrism and heliocentrism—with the Bible playing a very minor role. Hence, the conflict thesis reinterpreted the Galileo affair into something that it was not.
The promoters of the conflict thesis also retold the story of Christopher Columbus. Most people today persist in the belief that at the time of Columbus, nearly everyone thought that the earth was flat. According to the story, Columbus was one of the few people who thought the earth was spherical, and he understood that on a spherical earth one could sail westward from Europe to reach India and China. Supposedly, Columbus had to argue against strong objections coming from those who thought that the earth was flat to get support for his expedition. Finally, according to the story, Columbus managed to complete a voyage to the New World, and when he returned to Europe, people realized that Columbus was right—the world was round and not flat. Really? How did sailing from Europe to the Caribbean and back to Europe prove that the world was spherical? It didn't. The truth is that no one told Columbus he could not reach the Far East by sailing west. Everyone knew that it was possible, because everyone knew that the earth was spherical. The problem was that the earth was very large. Most people understood that the distance westward from Europe to the Far East was far greater than going eastward (a look at any globe proves this). The question was not how possible it was to reach Asia by going westward, but rather how feasible it was. The belief was that the ocean between Europe and Asia was vast, with little or no land in between. At the time of Columbus, voyages over open water were very risky, and ships rarely sailed more than three days out of the sight of land. A voyage westward across the ocean to Asia would have required months, with no opportunity for resupply or rescue along the way if problems developed.
The facts of history refute the commonly held story about Christopher Columbus. Much of the work supporting a flat earth today uncritically repeats and builds upon this false view. The flat earth movement began in the mid-nineteenth century, the same time that the conflict thesis was being developed. While the skeptics were ridiculing the Bible for allegedly teaching that the earth is flat, early flat-earthers foolishly accepted this false claim. Undoubtedly, the recent surge of interest in the flat earth among Christians has been fueled by the (false) belief that the Bible teaches that the earth is flat. Those who have enlisted in the flat-earth movement of late apparently are ignorant of the fact that those who promoted the conflict thesis made the same arguments to discredit the Bible. This could be ironic, or perhaps it is not. It is possible that certain people promoting the flat-earth today are doing so to discredit the Bible and Christianity all over again. If so, then Christians who have been misled into believing that the earth is flat have foolishly fallen into the trap.
wuzak
Captain
I personally can't speak top the veracity of their claims, but they do claim the bible sets out a flat earth beneath a firmament dome.
They have videos claiming the sun is between 3000 and 5000 miles away and inside the dome, yet there are also videos from on-board weather balloons which they claim have hit the dome - at 120,000ft.
Edit: Apparently the firmament idea came from Genesis. And while the Greeks figured the earth was round, they still thought there was a firmament.
They have videos claiming the sun is between 3000 and 5000 miles away and inside the dome, yet there are also videos from on-board weather balloons which they claim have hit the dome - at 120,000ft.
Edit: Apparently the firmament idea came from Genesis. And while the Greeks figured the earth was round, they still thought there was a firmament.
Last edited:
I made a smiley for that
Well all you guys had a lot of fun discussing these theories here, soi guess they at least serve a purpose, entertaining you.
