I have never quite understood why people like a flat earth model.
If all the planets we see in the sky are round, surely that would lead people to conclude
the earth is also round.
ME: Assumption, and the Bible calls these Wandering Stars. And hey, if we're playing pool with balls then the table MUST be a ball as well! *wink*.
Take a simple issue. The angle of the sun as it rises and sets each day. Starting from
Kenya, the further north you go, the lower in the sky the sun gets each day.
ME: You've just expressed the sun in the "Dome"/"Firmament". Awesome!
Now if the earth was flat, unless the sun was actually very close to the earth this
would be impossible. As the sun is unbelievably hot and massive, this would not work
But I suppose you could construct a model that might fit. It would be interesting to
see its geometry.
ME: FE = sun about 3000 miles away, and about the same size as the moon (interesting how we can believe our eyes MORE than we're told by ("the establishment", as someone on here called it) with the flat Earth.
The sun and moon size also explains "the phenomenon" of the lunar eclipse happening while they BOTH are seen ABOVE the horizon (You'll be fed BS about refraction on that one, always an "excuse" at every turn when it's so simple, which is easily debunked).
Also the night sky changes throughout the year, because the dark side of the earth
faces in a different direction as the earth rotates around the sun during the year.
ME: FE easily explains this too, they BOTH could be right in theory.
Now if you geometry is poor, and your sense of spacial awareness and model building
in your head, this might explain why this all sounds like made up stuff, but it actually
is not, it works.
ME: The math "works" on BOTH models, but the simpler and more observable solutions are with FE, the globe has to assume so many variables that the FE doesn't. The globe has changed it's numbers repeatedly and made them (numbers) larger to "fit". The FE doesn't have to do this. Just like with the "Theory of Gravity" that is not measurable/provable and ridiculous when you think about it... that it's force is so STRONG that holds the waters to the Earth, tons of weight with buildings Etc,.... but so WEAK that a butterfly can lift off the ground. BUT density and buoyancy explain this perfectly which is measurable and repeatable and SOUND....... WITHOUT the help of "gravity".