Flat earth debunked.
- Thread starter Gideon300
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Your comparing NASA astronauts to the disciples?!?! You know Peter denied Christ three times right? Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss. Just because we believe in Jesus, doesn't mean we are perfect, or near perfect. Just stating the obvious here.
It really sounds like your faith in the Heliocentric Model/NASA is equal to your faith in the Bible. If so, that is your testimony. Not saying, it's right or wrong, but don't agree on this issue. No biggy. I think we can both live our lives disagreeing on the moon landing and the shape of the earth.
It really sounds like your faith in the Heliocentric Model/NASA is equal to your faith in the Bible. If so, that is your testimony. Not saying, it's right or wrong, but don't agree on this issue. No biggy. I think we can both live our lives disagreeing on the moon landing and the shape of the earth.
Sure we can. FE people started this nonsensical debate. I don't have to guess about the shape of the earth. I know that it is a globe. I'm only concerned that some will be led astray by the FE follies.
I believe the sun is hot because if I stand in it, I warm up. If someone tells me that it is cold, I reject what they say.
Many FE people seem to think that NASA is the sole space authority. The universe does not revolve around America. The USSR was in space well before America. There are other space agencies. People from 44 countries have been into space, between 500 and 600 depending the definition of space. No FE has any evidence whatever that the earth is anything but a globe. No one has come back from space saying that the earth is flat. They've all said that the earth is a globe.
I believe the sun is hot because if I stand in it, I warm up. If someone tells me that it is cold, I reject what they say.
Many FE people seem to think that NASA is the sole space authority. The universe does not revolve around America. The USSR was in space well before America. There are other space agencies. People from 44 countries have been into space, between 500 and 600 depending the definition of space. No FE has any evidence whatever that the earth is anything but a globe. No one has come back from space saying that the earth is flat. They've all said that the earth is a globe.
Does the earth look something like this?
or more like this?
or more like this?
Maybe more something like this>>>
“The heavens are my throne
and the earth is my footstool."
It is he that sits upon the circle of the earth.
The four corners of the earth.
for the pillars of the earth are the LORD'S, and he hath set the world upon them
“The heavens are my throne
and the earth is my footstool."
It is he that sits upon the circle of the earth.
The four corners of the earth.
for the pillars of the earth are the LORD'S, and he hath set the world upon them
Within the framework of the Ball Earth model - sure - it would certainly be a logical conclusion. And, I would never "fault" anyone for making that conclusion from within that framework - because, it is in fact logical. Where reasoning fails is not realizing that the [real] truth actually lies outside of that particular framework. One has to "back up" far enough to see the real-and-true picture.
One must be willing to consider that the [real] truth may indeed be outside of that which they have been taught.
This is what this saying is all about:
"Truth is available only to those who have the courage to question whatever they have been taught." - (Author Unknown)
The truth is outside of what you have been taught. To see it and know it, you must have the courage to question what you have been taught.
One must be willing to consider that the [real] truth may indeed be outside of that which they have been taught.
This is what this saying is all about:
"Truth is available only to those who have the courage to question whatever they have been taught." - (Author Unknown)
The truth is outside of what you have been taught. To see it and know it, you must have the courage to question what you have been taught.
Newtonian philosophers teach us that the Moon goes round the Earth from west to east. But observation—man’s most certain mode of gaining knowledge—shows us that the Moon never ceases to move in the opposite direction—from east to west. Since, then, we know that nothing can possibly move in two, opposite directions at the same time, it is a proof that the thing is a big blunder; and, in short, it is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
Astronomers tell us that the Moon goes round the Earth in about 28 days. Well, we may see her making her journey round, every day, if we make use of our eyes—and these are about the best things we have to use. The Moon falls behind in her daily motion as compared with that of the Sun to the extent of one revolution in the time specified; but that is not making a revolution. Failing to go as fast as other bodies go in one direction does not constitute a going round in the opposite one—as the astronomers would have us believe! And, since all this absurdity has been rendered necessary for no other purpose than to help other absurdities along, it is clear that the astronomers are on the wrong track; and it needs no long train of reasoning to show that we have a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
It has been shown that meridians are, necessarily, straight lines; and that it is impossible to travel round the Earth in a north or south direction: from which it follows that, in the general acceptation of the word “degree,”—the 360th part of a circle—meridians have no degrees: for no one knows anything of a meridian circle or semicircle, to be thus divided. But astronomers speak of degrees of latitude in the same sense as those of longitude. This, then, is done by assuming that to be true which is not true. Zetetic philosophy does not involve this necessity. This proves that the basis of this philosophy is a sound one, and, in short, is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
If we move away from an elevated object on or over a plain or a prairie, the height of the object will apparently diminish as we do so. Now, that which is sufficient to produce this effect on a small scale is sufficient on a large one; and travelling away from an elevated object, no matter how high, over a level surface, no matter how far, will cause the appearance in question—the lowering of the object. Our modern theoretical astronomers, however, in the case of the apparent lowering of the North Star as we travel southward, assert that it is evidence that the Earth is globular! But, as it is clear that an appearance which is fully accounted for on the basis of known facts cannot be permitted to figure as evidence in favor of that which is only a supposition, it follows that we rightfully order it to stand down, and make way for a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
There are rivers which flow east, west, north, and south—that is, rivers are flowing in all directions over the Earth’s surface, and at the same time. Now, if the Earth were a globe, some of these rivers would be flowing up-hill and others down, taking it for a fact that there really is an “up” and a “down” in nature, whatever form she assumes. But, since rivers do not flow up-hill, and the globular theory requires that they should, it is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
If the Earth were a globe, rolling and dashing through “space” at the rate of “a hundred miles in five seconds of time,” the waters of seas and oceans could not, by any known law, be kept on its surface—the assertion that they could be retained under these circumstances being an outrage upon human understanding and credulity! But as the Earth—that is, the habitable world of dry land—is found to be “standing out of the water and in the water” of the “mighty deep,” whose circumferential boundary is ice, we may throw the statement back into the teeth of those who make it and flaunt before their faces the flag of reason and common sense, inscribed with—a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
The theory of a rotating and revolving earth demands a theory to keep the water on its surface; but, as the theory which is given for this purpose is as much opposed to all human experience as the one which it is intended to uphold, it is an illustration of the miserable makeshifts to which astronomers are compelled to resort, and affords a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
If we could—after our minds had once been opened to the light of Truth—conceive of a globular body on the surface of which human beings could exist, the power—no matter by what name it be called—that would hold them on would, then, necessarily, have to be so constraining and cogent that they could not live; the waters of the oceans would have to be as a solid mass, for motion would be impossible. But we not only exist, but live and move; and the water of the ocean skips and dances like a thing of life and beauty! This is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.
It is well known that the law regulating the apparent decrease in the size of objects as we leave them in the distance (or as they leave us) is very different with luminous bodies from what it is in the case of those which are non-luminous. Sail past the light of a small lamp in a row-boat on a dark night, and it will seem to be no smaller when a mile off than it was when close to it. Proctor says, in speaking of the Sun: “his apparent size does not change,”—far off or near. And then he forgets the fact! Mr. Proctor tells us, subsequently, that, if [23]the traveller goes so far south that the North Star appears on the horizon, “the Sun should therefore look much larger”—if the Earth were a plane! Therefore, he argues, “the path followed cannot have been the straight course,”—but a curved one. Now, since it is nothing but common scientific trickery to bring forward, as an objection to stand in the way of a plane Earth, the non-appearance of a thing which has never been known to appear at all, it follows that, unless that which appears to be trickery were an accident, it was the only course open to the objector—to trick. (Mr. Proctor, in a letter to the “English Mechanic” for Oct. 20, 1871, boasts of having turned a recent convert to the Zetetic philosophy by telling him that his arguments were all very good, but that “it seems as though [mark the language!] the sun ought to look nine times larger in summer.” And Mr. Proctor concludes thus: “He saw, indeed, that, in his faith in ‘Parallax,’ he had ‘written himself down an ass.’ ”) Well, then: trickery or no trickery on the part of the objector, the objection is a counterfeit—a fraud—no valid objection at all; and it follows that the system which does not purge itself of these things is a rotten system, and the system which its advocates, with Mr. Proctor at their head, would crush if they could find a weapon to use—the Zetetic philosophy of “Parallax”—is destined to live! This is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.