Is The Earth Flat Or Round?

[Dino246]

Newton also theorized and it is now commonly taught that the Earth’s ocean tides are caused by gravitational lunar attraction. If the Moon is only 2,160 miles in diameter and the Earth 8,000 miles, however, using their own math and “law,” it follows that the Earth is 87 times more massive and therefore the larger object should attract the smaller to it, and not the other way around. If the Earth’s greater gravity is what keeps the Moon in orbit, it is impossible for the Moon’s lesser gravity to supersede the Earth’s gravity, especially at Earth’s sea-level, where its gravitational attraction would even further out-trump the Moon’s. And if the Moon’s gravity truly did supersede the Earth’s causing the tides to be drawn towards it, there should be nothing to stop them from continuing onwards and upwards towards their great attractor.

View attachment 246203

This time, it’s your ignorance of basic arithmetic that is the problem.

 

[oyster67]

In other words, the southern hemisphere should always without exception have hotter summers than the northern hemisphere?

(Think about it...)

All other things being equal, yes. That is what makes your video so fascinating. My guess would be that there is more geothermal activity going on in the northern areas. Is it Iceland that is known for it's hotsprings? Some would probably attribute it to an ozonal "hole in the pole."

 

[Webers.Home]

.
Baby we was making straight A's,
But we were stuck in a dumb daze.

Don’t take much to memorize your lie.
I feel like I've been hypnotisized.

And then that magic man; he come to town.
Whoo wee!
He just spun my head around.

He said: Recess is in session,
2 + 2 make 5

And now baby, oh, I’m alive.
Oh yeah!
I’m alive
(School Of Rock, 2003)
_

 

[oyster67]

Baby we was making straight A's,
But we were stuck in a dumb daze.

Story of my life.

Getting old sucks.

 

[RaceRunner]

The Sun’s light is golden, warm, drying, preservative and antiseptic, while the Moon’s light is silver, cool, damp, putrefying and septic. The Sun’s rays decrease the combustion of a bonfire, while the Moon’s rays increase combustion. Plant and animal substances exposed to sunlight quickly dry, shrink, coagulate, and lose the tendency to decompose and putrify; grapes and other fruits become solid, partially candied and preserved like raisins, dates, and prunes; animal flesh coagulates, loses its volatile gaseous constituents, becomes firm, dry, and slow to decay. When exposed to moonlight, however, plant and animal substances tend to show symptoms of putrefaction and decay. This proves that Sun and Moon light are different, unique, and opposites as they are in the geocentric flat model.

 

[RaceRunner]

In direct sunlight a thermometer will read higher than another thermometer placed in the shade, but in full, direct moonlight a thermometer will read lower than another placed in the shade. If the Sun’s light is collected in a large lens and thrown to a focus point it can create significant heat, while the Moon’s light collected similarly creates no heat. In the "Lancet Medical Journal,” from March 14th, 1856, particulars are given of several experiments which proved the Moon's rays when concentrated can actually reduce the temperature upon a thermometer more than eight degrees. So sunlight and moonlight clearly have altogether different properties.

 

[RaceRunner]

Furthermore the Moon itself cannot physically be both a spherical body and a reflector of the Sun’s light. Reflectors must be flat or concave for light rays to have any angle of incidence; If a reflector’s surface is convex then every ray of light points in a direct line with the radius perpendicular to the surface resulting in no reflection.

 

[RaceRunner]

Not only is the Moon clearly self-luminescent, shining its own unique light, but it is also largely transparent. When the waxing or waning Moon is visible during the day it is possible to see the blue sky right through the Moon. And on a clear night, during a waxing or waning cycle, it is even possible to occasionally see stars and “planets” directly through the surface of the Moon! The Royal Astronomical Society has on record many such occurrences throughout history which all defy the heliocentric model.

 

[RaceRunner]

Many people think that modern astronomy’s ability to accurately predict lunar and solar eclipses is a result and proof positive of the heliocentric theory of the universe. The fact of the matter however is that eclipses have been accurately predicted by cultures worldwide for thousands of years before the “heliocentric ball-Earth” was even a glimmer in Copernicus’ imagination. Ptolemy in the 1st century A.D. accurately predicted eclipses for six hundred years on the basis of a flat, stationary Earth with equal precision as anyone living today. All the way back in 600 B.C. Thales accurately predicted an eclipse which ended the war between the Medes and Lydians. Eclipses happen regularly with precision in 18 year cycles, so regardless of geocentric or heliocentric, flat or globe Earth cosmologies, eclipses can be accurately calculated independent of such factors.

 

[RaceRunner]

Another assumption and supposed proof of Earth’s shape, heliocentrists claim that lunar eclipses are caused by the shadow of the ball-Earth occulting the Moon. They claim the Sun, Earth, and Moon spheres perfectly align like three billiard balls in a row so that the Sun’s light casts the Earth’s shadow onto the Moon. Unfortunately for heliocentrists, this explanation is rendered completely invalid due to the fact that lunar eclipses have happened and continue to happen regularly when both the Sun and Moon are still visible together above the horizon! For the Sun’s light to be casting Earth’s shadow onto the Moon, the three bodies must be aligned in a straight 180 degree syzygy, but as early as the time of Pliny, there are records of lunar eclipses happening while both the Sun and Moon are visible in the sky. Therefore the eclipsor of the Moon cannot be the Earth/Earth’s shadow and some other explanation must be sought.

 

[Ted01]

Another assumption and supposed proof of Earth’s shape, heliocentrists claim that lunar eclipses are caused by the shadow of the ball-Earth occulting the Moon. They claim the Sun, Earth, and Moon spheres perfectly align like three billiard balls in a row so that the Sun’s light casts the Earth’s shadow onto the Moon. Unfortunately for heliocentrists, this explanation is rendered completely invalid due to the fact that lunar eclipses have happened and continue to happen regularly when both the Sun and Moon are still visible together above the horizon! For the Sun’s light to be casting Earth’s shadow onto the Moon, the three bodies must be aligned in a straight 180 degree syzygy, but as early as the time of Pliny, there are records of lunar eclipses happening while both the Sun and Moon are visible in the sky. Therefore the eclipsor of the Moon cannot be the Earth/Earth’s shadow and some other explanation must be sought.

View attachment 246221

Do you have any supporting evidence of this?

 

[tourist]

This has gone beyond ignorance.
It's plain stupidity.

I certainly do agree with you but at the same time, often amusing.

 

[tourist]

Do you have any supporting evidence of this?

No, just what the Flat Earth Society has put out.

 

[RaceRunner]

Do you have any supporting evidence of this?

I along with many millions of people have seen the moon and sun at the same time; this proves the earth is not a globe.

 

[Dino246]

The Sun’s light is golden, warm, drying, preservative and antiseptic, while the Moon’s light is silver, cool, damp, putrefying and septic. The Sun’s rays decrease the combustion of a bonfire, while the Moon’s rays increase combustion. Plant and animal substances exposed to sunlight quickly dry, shrink, coagulate, and lose the tendency to decompose and putrify; grapes and other fruits become solid, partially candied and preserved like raisins, dates, and prunes; animal flesh coagulates, loses its volatile gaseous constituents, becomes firm, dry, and slow to decay. When exposed to moonlight, however, plant and animal substances tend to show symptoms of putrefaction and decay. This proves that Sun and Moon light are different, unique, and opposites as they are in the geocentric flat model.

That's the most ridiculous piece of unscientific hogwash I've read all week... which is saying a lot for this thread.

 

[oyster67]

Sounds like someone is babble-dabbling in some sort of voodoo.

 

[GaryA]

When a child realizes that he was lied to by those who he trusted and looked up to (the public education system), he becomes very suspicious and questions every theory (especially when it was deceitfully presented as fact.)

And, not just children - but, adults also...

 

[GaryA]

The Sun’s annual journey from tropic to tropic, solstice to solstice, is what determines the length and character of days, nights and seasons. This is why equatorial regions experience almost year-round summer and heat while higher latitudes North and especially South experience more distinct seasons with harsh winters. The heliocentric model claims seasons change based on the ball-Earth’s alleged “axial tilt” and “elliptical orbit” around the Sun, yet their flawed current model places us closest to the Sun (91,400,000 miles) in January when its actually winter, and farthest from the Sun (94,500,000 miles) in July when its actually summer throughout most of the Earth.

View attachment 246211

The idea of the earth having an "elliptical orbit" around the sun is a fallacy.

The slingshot-around-the-sun 'effect' is cool in science-fiction movie plots; however, the 'real physics' truth is - unless there is an outside force to propel an object away from the sun, it would only continue to spiral closer-and-closer until it "fell into" the sun.

There is a presumption in the slingshot-around-the-sun 'effect' that there is some kind of invisible gravitational 'tether' that automatically "latches onto" an object and then releases it ("magically") 180-degrees later after the direction of travel has been reversed so that the object may "go back from whence it came"; however, in reality, it would not work that way. In such a situation, the gravitational pull of the sun would only cause the object to continuously be drawn in closer-and-closer to the sun.

Centrifical force alone is not enough to "break free" from a spiral-into-the-sun pattern once the momentum of an object in the original direction is "broken"/"changed" - anything before that point would only deflect it and send it out into space in a different direction; anything after that point would 'trap' the object into a spiral-into-the-sun pattern from which it could not escape.

At-the-very-absolute-best, the object might be drawn into a circular orbit around the sun - if a 'perfect balance' is established between the sun and the object at the proper distance.

The idea of a perpetual elliptical orbit around the sun is nonsensical. Such an 'effect' would require another outside force that simply does not exist in the Ball Earth model.

And, the 'orbits' of "other planets" are insufficient to the requirements of the outside force to maintain a perpetual [unchanging] elliptical orbit of the earth around the sun. (I need to "wrap up" this post; I will not address it in this post.)

 

[GaryA]

They both attract each other. They are essentially in love.

The orbital motion (revolution) of the moon around the Earth keeps it at a fixed distance.

In love, but "keeping at a distance" - oh, come on now...

 

[GaryA]

Nonetheless, I find it interesting, challenging, and educational.

Good!

The beginning of knowledge and understanding is "the swallowing of pride"...

It would be really wonderful if everyone "swallowed their pride" and found it interesting, challenging, and educational.

Kudos!