Is The Earth Flat Or Round?

[RaceRunner]

If the Earth were actually a big ball 25,000 miles in circumference, the horizon would be noticeably curved even at sea-level, and everything on or approaching the horizon would appear to tilt backwards slightly from your perspective. Distant buildings along the horizon would all look like leaning towers of Piza falling away from the observer. A hot-air balloon taking off then drifting steadily away from you, on a ball-Earth would slowly and constantly appear to lean back more and more the farther away it flew, the bottom of the basket coming gradually into view as the top of the balloon disappears from sight. In reality, however, buildings, balloons, trees, people, anything and everything at right angles to the ground/horizon remains so regardless the distance or height of the observer.

 

[RaceRunner]

Samuel Rowbotham’s experiments at the Old Bedford Level proved conclusively the canal’s water to be completely flat over a 6 mile stretch. First he stood in the canal with his telescope held 8 inches above the surface of the water, then his friend in a boat with a 5 foot tall flag sailed the 6 miles away. If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference the 6 mile stretch of water should have comprised an arc exactly 6 feet high in the middle, so the entire boat and flag should have ultimately disappeared, when in fact the entire boat and flag remained visible at the same height for the entire journey.

 

[RaceRunner]

In a second experiment Dr. Rowbotham affixed flags 5 feet high along the shoreline, one at every mile marker. Then using his telescope mounted at 5 feet just behind the first flag looked over the tops of all 6 flags which lined up in a perfectly straight line. If the Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference the flags should have progressively dipped down after the first establishing line of sight, the second would have descended 8 inches, 32 inches for the third, 6 feet for the fourth, 10 feet 8 inches for the fifth, and 16 feet 8 inches for the sixth.

 

[RaceRunner]

Quoting “Earth Not a Globe!” by Samuel Rowbotham, “It is known that the horizon at sea, whatever distance it may extend to the right and left of the observer on land, always appears as a straight line. The following experiment has been tried in various parts of the country. At Brighton, on a rising ground near the race course, two poles were fixed in the earth six yards apart, and directly opposite the sea. Between these poles a line was tightly stretched parallel to the horizon. From the center of the line the view embraced not less than 20 miles on each side making a distance of 40 miles. A vessel was observed sailing directly westwards; the line cut the rigging a little above the bulwarks, which it did for several hours or until the vessel had sailed the whole distance of 40 miles. The ship coming into view from the east would have to ascend an inclined plane for 20 miles until it arrived at the center of the arc, whence it would have to descend for the same distance. The square of 20 miles multiplied by 8 inches gives 266 feet as the amount the vessel would be below the line at the beginning and at the end of the 40 miles.”

 

[RaceRunner]

Also Quoting Dr. Rowbotham, “On the shore near Waterloo, a few miles to the north of Liverpool, a good telescope was fixed, at an elevation of 6 feet above the water. It was directed to a large steamer, just leaving the River Mersey, and sailing out to Dublin. Gradually the mast-head of the receding vessel came nearer to the horizon, until, at length, after more than four hours had elapsed, it disappeared. The ordinary rate of sailing of the Dublin steamers was fully eight miles an hour; so that the vessel would be, at least, thirty-two miles distant when the mast-head came to the horizon. The 6 feet of elevation of the telescope would require three miles to be deducted for convexity, which would leave twenty-nine miles, the square of which, multiplied by 8 inches, gives 560 feet; deducting 80 feet for the height of the main-mast, and we find that, according to the doctrine of rotundity, the mast-head of the outward bound steamer should have been 480 feet below the horizon. Many other experiments of this kind have been made upon sea-going steamers, and always with results entirely incompatible with the theory that the earth is a globe.”

 

[VARob]

Now, as a Christian, I'm supposed to be a compassionate kind of guy. Well;
the truth is: I am unable to pity flatters; I think they're just plane evil; and
willfully so rather than innocently.

Was your use of "plane" intentional? If so, given the topic, it's pretty funny.

I wouldn't say they were evil, just exceedingly ignorant, whether willful or not.

 

[RaceRunner]

Was your use of "plane" intentional? If so, given the topic, it's pretty funny.

I wouldn't say they were evil, just exceedingly ignorant, whether willful or not.

Luke 6:22
"Blessed shall you be when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake."

 

[VARob]

Luke 6:22
"Blessed shall you be when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake."

I certainly don't hate you or separate you. Nor do I reproach you for the Son of man's sake, but for your abject ignorance on the topic of the shape of the earth and the cosmos.

 

[RaceRunner]

I certainly don't hate you or separate you. Nor do I reproach you for the Son of man's sake, but for your abject ignorance on the topic of the shape of the earth and the cosmos.

Jesus is showing you in the above picture that you are the ignorant one regarding the shape of the earth; thank you Lord Jesus.

 

[RaceRunner]

Dr. Rowbotham conducted several other experiments using telescopes, spirit levels, sextants and “theodolites,” special precision instruments used for measuring angles in horizontal or vertical planes. By positioning them at equal heights aimed at each other successively he proved over and over the Earth to be perfectly flat for miles without a single inch of curvature. His findings caused quite a stir in the scientific community and thanks to 30 years of his efforts, the shape of the Earth became a hot topic of debate around the turn of the nineteenth century.

 

[GaryA]

You're right, maybe I did misunderstand him. But this:


"Much faster" is a gross exaggeration. The top part of the atmosphere would be spinning a very slightly faster than the lower parts. The radius of the earth is ~4000 miles. The top of the stratosphere ranges between 12 and 31 miles. For fun, lets say it averages 20 miles high. That's .5% of the radius of the earth. Using rough numbers, if the earth is rotating 1000 mph at its equator, the top of the stratosphere would be traveling 1005 mph, which is hardly "much faster."

I can accept that...

Nonetheless, it is still 'significant' with regard to everything being "dragged along" in perfect synchronization with the rotation of the earth.

The idea that 'gravity' allows for lateral movement relative to the ground but not relative to the center of the earth is idiotic at best.

For the earth to have such a tight hold on something in a vertical direction that it "drags" it in a horizontal direction in an absolute rigid way suggests that there is a horizontal force that is orders of magnitude above the downward pull of gravity itself acting on everything with "infinite power" against any amount of resistance whatsoever.

Otherwise, it suggests that the atmosphere has no fluidity at all whatsoever while also being hard-fixed to the earth.

However, we know that cannot be true - because, lateral movement in the atmosphere is an everyday real thing.

So - where does this invincible "sideways" force come from?

Operating in a fluid medium, it cannot possibly come from 'gravity' - which only has a 'downward' pull on an object.

In this Ball Earth scenario:

An object at any height does not fall to the ground in zero time; rather, it is acted upon by gravity - and, accelerates as it falls over time.

BUT - in the horizontal direction - oh, no - the object has no option but to be coerced by an 'absolute infinite power' - in zero time - to follow the rotation of the earth under 'instant infinite acceleration' (to achieve instantaneous movement).

I know what you are going to say - "it was already in motion" - but, what set it in motion orginally - and, what keeps it in motion?

Since 'gravity' only has a 'downward' pull - the mysterious "sideways" force must come into play the moment an object leaves ["attachment to the earth"] and maintain until the object is ["reattached to the earth"].

After the effects of simple inertia at the moment an object is "off the tether", there is nothing whatsoever to sustain the "sideways" motion of the object indefinitely.

When an object is "off the tether" for a long-enough period of time - the effects of simple inertia cease - due to "air drag" among other [possible] things.

What then keeps the object locked in perfect synchronization with the earth?

When an airplane takes off, it becomes a "free agent" in the fluid 'atmosphere' environment.

The only 'gravitational' force that can be said to be acting on it is in a 'downward' direction.

What mysterious invincible "sideways" force keeps it locked in perfect synchronization with the earth?

 

[VARob]

So - where does this invincible "sideways" force come from?

Inertia.

I know what you are going to say - "it was already in motion" - but, what set it in motion orginally - and, what keeps it in motion?

Inertia. The earth has been rotating for at least 6,000 years. (Young earth creation vs old earth creation is a different topic..)

When an object is "off the tether" for a long-enough period of time - the effects of simple inertia cease - due to "air drag" among other [possible] things.

The air is rotating right along with everything else.

What mysterious invincible "sideways" force keeps it locked in perfect synchronization with the earth?

Inertia. The atmosphere rotates in sync with the earth. Of course there are variations... That's why flying east to west generally takes longer than flying west to east.

The next time you fly (assuming you believe in airplanes... ), when you're cruising along at 35,000 feet altitude at ~500mph, drop a quarter on the floor of the aisle. Where does the quarter land? Even though you're moving at 500mph, the quarter lands directly below its release point. Why? Inertia. The plane is moving 500mph. You are moving at 500mph. The quarter was moving 500mph (horizontally). The air in the plane is moving at 500mph. Relative to you being in the plane, the quarter fell straight down. However, from the perspective of someone on the ground, the quarter did not fall straight down at all. It was moving 500mph horizontally the entire time.

If the plane was flying east at the equator, and you were observing the plane from a stationary position in space, since the earth rotates ~1000mph at the equator and the atmpsphere rotates along with the earth, the plane would be moving ~1500 miles an hour toward the east. If the plane was flying west at the equator, and you were observing the plane from a stationary position in space, the plane would be moving ~500 miles an hour to the east.

This is basic physics.

 

[Webers.Home]

.

Was your use of "plane" intentional?

It's a spelling error: caught it too late.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
When I was a kid, it was amusing to throw something out of my dad's car
and watch it move in three directions. 1) outward away from the car, 2)
forward with the car's momentum, and 3) downward with the pull of gravity.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
FUN FAQ: Why do bubbles in water rise instead of hover?

REPLY: Water is heavier than air; so gravity steadily pulls water down
under bubbles, thus pushing them upwards.
_

 

[RaceRunner]

The distance across the Irish Sea from the Isle of Man’s Douglas Harbor to Great Orm’s Head in North Wales is 60 miles. If the Earth was a globe then the surface of the water between them would form a 60 mile arc, the center towering 1944 feet higher than the coastlines at either end. It is well-known and easily verifiable, however, that on a clear day, from a modest altitude of 100 feet, the Great Orm’s Head is visible from Douglas Harbor. This would be completely impossible on a globe of 25,000 miles. Assuming the 100 foot altitude causes the horizon to appear approximately 13 miles off, the 47 miles remaining means the Welsh coastline should still fall an impossible 1472 feet below the line of sight!

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

I’m leaning towards flat, I don’t see any conclusive evidence in scripture to disprove a flat, stationary earth or prove a space-ball.
Also, I was a land surveyor for 20+ years, curvature observation and calculation are completely absent in this field.
In my opinion, either the globe is tremendously larger than stated (which is unlikely for obvious reasons) or it’s flat.
As Christian’s we must remember scripture is the only thing we can be absolutely sure of. Since scripture does not state either way, we should resort to observation. By my observation there’s no curve. 🤷‍♂️
For those of you without survey knowledge who like to argue for the sake of arguing there are some flat earth surveying and line of sight videos online. Suggest you check them out before letting your thumbs fly on this post.

You're misrepresenting the field I think.
Plane surveying is used for shorter distances where the curve of the earth is irrelevant. It doesn't indicate that the planet is flat.

 

[Webers.Home]

.

I certainly don't hate you or separate you. Nor do I reproach you for the Son
of man's sake, but for your abject ignorance on the topic of the shape of the
earth and the cosmos.

My personal feelings for folks who go about insisting 2+2=5 can be summed
up in one word: DISGUST
_

 

[shittim]

Pretty crafty way for the enemy to get our focus from what is honorable and honors the Lord as we are required.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Pretty crafty way for the enemy to get our focus from what is honorable and honors the Lord as we are required.

Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

It perplexes us to see that belief in a “flat earth” is gaining traction, despite being thoroughly debunked for thousands of years. This idea was almost non-existent until recently, yet this particular branch of pseudoscience is making inroads. It’s notable that the article The Flat Earth Myth, busting the myth that the church taught a flat earth, written as recently as 2013, did not receive any negative comments from flat-earth believers. Why? Because there were hardly any people back then who believed it! Rather, readers were grateful to see that the church had never taught this nonsense. Several honest atheists have even slammed people from their own side who have pushed a bad pseudo-history that accuses the church of teaching a flat earth.1

So, if almost nobody believed it back then, why do some people believe it now? This includes several who commented on an article published earlier this year: Isaiah 40:22 and the shape of the earth. Most of the influence today is coming from a series of online videos that have been shared widely. These were created by charlatans and, sadly, are deceiving many. Even more sadly, some Christians are being caught up in the hype.

https://creation.com/refuting-flat-earth

*
Who invented the idea of a flat Earth?
https://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c034.html