No, the earth is not flat

  • 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.

2ndTimothyGroup

Well-known member
Feb 20, 2021
5,883
1,952
113
#21
Well this is odd. The dudes on the ISS are spacewalking right now and what's interesting is that they aren't moving in slow motion like the astronauts were back in 1969. I wonder why that is?

LOL! Their cameras were turning such that it made the round earth 100% flat, so they cut the "live feed" and changed angles RIGHT BEFORE the earth would have appeared to be concave. Can't make this stuff up!! :);):p:D:LOL::ROFL:
 
Aug 3, 2019
3,744
507
113
#22
I can appreciate questioning the powers that be and all, but the earth is not flat. Two indisputable observations prove it:

1. You cannot see all stars from all points, and that's due to curve of the earth. From our perspective in the northern hemisphere, we cannot see the Southern Cross. And they cannot see northern hemisphere stars from the south. I have never seen a flat earther explain how this can possibly comport with their dome model. If you've ever visited a dome (like the Capitol Rotunda) you can see everything in it from any point under it. Look at any of the countless models of the so-called flat earth online. Pick a point - any point. Then ask yourself why you cannot see all the stars from that point. It simply does not make sense.
2. The apparent rotation of the stars is another easy objection to the flat earth model. When you observe the stars and trace them over the course of an evening, they appear to rotate counter-clockwise in the northern hemisphere and clockwise in the southern. Known as diurnal motion, this fits exactly with what you would expect from a sphere. It's not even worth exploring how different constellations of stars could appear to rotate in complete opposite directions under a dome.

Again, these are observations anyone can make with their own eyes. There is no room for CGI, fish eye lenses, NASA conspiracies, or the other usual litany of conspiracies flat earthers use to dismiss "globe earthers" out of hand. Sorry. Earth isn't flat.
Yeah, but the Reptilian Conspiracy folks make the Flat Earthers look like rocked scientists.
 
F

FrancisClare

Guest
#23
I'm sorry friend I'm really not following you. Though you certainly have a nice gift for visual imagery in your writing. Very nice. I got caught up in it! Maybe I'm getting to tired. I will give it all another look tomorrow. The light of day will no doubt bring clarity. Bless you and sleep well.
 
Jan 5, 2022
1,224
620
113
37
"A higher plane," hehe
www.youtube.com
#25
I stand corrected. There are quite a few "photos" of round earth from the moon (with astronauts in them), but they're so stupid-looking. I can't believe that we were so ignorant back in the day that we couldn't "see" the ridiculousness of it all. They're literally laughable. :ROFL::ROFL::ROFL::ROFL:
There are no photographs of a globe Earth. The next-gen satellite just launched on Christmas won't be giving us any either. Officially, the back of the satellite is covered with sensitive electronics which would be damage by direct sunlight, so the satellite will sit at the Lagrange point and NEVER turn to face the Earth. How about that.
 
Jan 5, 2022
1,224
620
113
37
"A higher plane," hehe
www.youtube.com
#26
I can appreciate questioning the powers that be and all, but the earth is not flat. Two indisputable observations prove it:

1. You cannot see all stars from all points, and that's due to curve of the earth. From our perspective in the northern hemisphere, we cannot see the Southern Cross. And they cannot see northern hemisphere stars from the south. I have never seen a flat earther explain how this can possibly comport with their dome model. If you've ever visited a dome (like the Capitol Rotunda) you can see everything in it from any point under it. Look at any of the countless models of the so-called flat earth online. Pick a point - any point. Then ask yourself why you cannot see all the stars from that point. It simply does not make sense.
2. The apparent rotation of the stars is another easy objection to the flat earth model. When you observe the stars and trace them over the course of an evening, they appear to rotate counter-clockwise in the northern hemisphere and clockwise in the southern. Known as diurnal motion, this fits exactly with what you would expect from a sphere. It's not even worth exploring how different constellations of stars could appear to rotate in complete opposite directions under a dome.

Again, these are observations anyone can make with their own eyes. There is no room for CGI, fish eye lenses, NASA conspiracies, or the other usual litany of conspiracies flat earthers use to dismiss "globe earthers" out of hand. Sorry. Earth isn't flat.
I like you, Kris, but coincidentally, I watched some FE materials in just the last two days that discussed both of these points. I actually have the videos downloaded but if I can find them online again I'll try to post the links. But I'm generally familiar with everything you are talking about.

Concerning 1. there are other explanations that you simply haven't considered. For example, we are told that we have an almost infinite viewing range because we can see the stars which are hundreds of millions of light years away. This assumption drives so many others. It's actually possible that all stars cannot be seen from all points because we aren't able to see infinitely far. And then there are the visual distortion effects of the atmosphere, which is a fluid medium. Globers will resort to refraction to explain away a SELENELION, a daytime lunar eclipse, where both the moon and sun are visible above the horizon. There are actually a lot of distortions due to refraction, perspective, and the fact that the atmosphere acts as a lens due to gradients of moisure, density, and other factors.

2. Is the one I recently watched a video on. I'm too tired right now to explain it in detail myself, but it is here:
https://www.theflatearthpodcast.com/portfolio/how-the-southern-stars-work-on-flat-earth/
 

TheLearner

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2019
8,172
1,571
113
68
Brighton, MI
#28
Well this is odd. The dudes on the ISS are spacewalking right now and what's interesting is that they aren't moving in slow motion like the astronauts were back in 1969. I wonder why that is?

LOL! Their cameras were turning such that it made the round earth 100% flat, so they cut the "live feed" and changed angles RIGHT BEFORE the earth would have appeared to be concave. Can't make this stuff up!! :);):p:D:LOL::ROFL:
I was walking on sunshine and they did not have to alter the pictures, video.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,325
13,713
113
#29
And if anyone catches that Gertrude Stein allusion i will include you in my prayers for the rest of my life!
The only thing I know about Gertrude Stein is that Picasso painted her portrait.
 

2ndTimothyGroup

Well-known member
Feb 20, 2021
5,883
1,952
113
#30
The light of day will no doubt bring clarity.
Haha . . . not necessarily! We're talking about fakery. So to talk about fakery with clarity can be a challenge. I'm probably failing to explain my fakery thinkering in a faulty way. :)
 

2ndTimothyGroup

Well-known member
Feb 20, 2021
5,883
1,952
113
#33
There are no photographs of a globe Earth. The next-gen satellite just launched on Christmas won't be giving us any either. Officially, the back of the satellite is covered with sensitive electronics which would be damage by direct sunlight, so the satellite will sit at the Lagrange point and NEVER turn to face the Earth. How about that.
Pretty incredible, isn't it? I just watched an ISS interview where this "astronaut" was teaching children that outside the window of their spaceship when in the sun it is 150 degrees, but then out of the line of sunlight it was something like negative 150 degrees. What electronics that we are aware of, can endure those kinds of conditions?

It is amazing that people fall for this stuff.
 
F

FrancisClare

Guest
#34
Pretty incredible, isn't it? I just watched an ISS interview where this "astronaut" was teaching children that outside the window of their spaceship when in the sun it is 150 degrees, but then out of the line of sunlight it was something like negative 150 degrees. What electronics that we are aware of, can endure those kinds of conditions?

It is amazing that people fall for this stuff.
Forgive me I'm getting dense but I don't follow you here.
 
F

FrancisClare

Guest
#35
It really wasn't about the world being round. It was about a little girl and how confusing growing up can be. Its a lovely peice. Filled with G S playful language. My favorite writer.
 

2ndTimothyGroup

Well-known member
Feb 20, 2021
5,883
1,952
113
#36
Forgive me I'm getting dense but I don't follow you here.
Ahhh . . . what I'm getting at is the 300-degree differential. JStates was referencing electronics being damaged in the sunlight/heat in outer space, so I added onto that thinking with the concept of such an extreme heat differential. Think of a rubber tire that goes from 150 degrees to being deeply, deeply frozen day in and day out. That tire just isn't going to last long. Not unless, however, we were to develop a new form of rubber. Maybe that's a bad example, and maybe rubber [can] endure such extreme heat differentials.

In the end, I'm just a regular person with no training or education on these matters. I'm not an expert, but I do enjoy posting questions to others to see their response. It amazes me how "triggered" people become over this stuff. It's as if having an opinion were equivalent to murder, or something.
 
F

FrancisClare

Guest
#37
I'm still not getting your point. Forgive me.
 
F

FrancisClare

Guest
#38
Ahhh . . . what I'm getting at is the 300-degree differential. JStates was referencing electronics being damaged in the sunlight/heat in outer space, so I added onto that thinking with the concept of such an extreme heat differential. Think of a rubber tire that goes from 150 degrees to being deeply, deeply frozen day in and day out. That tire just isn't going to last long. Not unless, however, we were to develop a new form of rubber. Maybe that's a bad example, and maybe rubber [can] endure such extreme heat differentials.

In the end, I'm just a regular person with no training or education on these matters. I'm not an expert, but I do enjoy posting questions to others to see their response. It amazes me how "triggered" people become over this stuff. It's as if having an opinion were equivalent to murder, or something.
Sad but all to true.