Does the Bible support the idea of a spinning ball earth flying through space, or is that a Satanic, Masonic lie?

[Fundaamental]

if objects like planets that rotate around the sun, are not within 95% spherical, they would fly off like a meteor with actually flat edges. outside of the pull from the sun, the earth has density that forces the world to be heavy. if it stood still, it would literally just drop like a ball due to Gravity. but it rotates and the sun can be seen around the globe in a full 24 hour period. the density of the Earth combined with the sun gravitational pull, creates inertia [movement]. and by doing the same motion not stop makes it become arrow dynamic [which God made it that way to begin with...but how to solve it by Math, is how i am explaining it]...the same motion cleans the rough edges to a smooth sphere.

observation from astronomy and scientists tells us all plannets spin and rotate around our sun, some faster dew to its mass and density like Jupiter a giant gas ball, has less density but more mass.

But something else is also always spinning in us, people with an acute sensitivity to it suffer vertigo, and often experience a feeling like there head is spinning,

I often get it but I know some get it more than others lol

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

observation from astronomy and scientists tells us all plannets spin and rotate around our sun, some faster dew to its mass and density like Jupiter a giant gas ball, has less density but more mass.

But something else is also always spinning in us, people with an acute sensitivity to it suffer vertigo, and often experience a feeling like there head is spinning,

I often get it but I know some get it more than others lol

enlisted soldiers were selected based upon certain trigger factors and this was one of them that would cause someone to be rejected for a pilot, chute diver/jumper, night time events, possibly heights like walking mountain paths made of rope over streams 3k feet down.

 

[Fundaamental]

enlisted soldiers were selected based upon certain trigger factors and this was one of them that would cause someone to be rejected for a pilot, chute diver/jumper, night time events, possibly heights like walking mountain paths made of rope over streams 3k feet down.

yeah it's understandable wouldn't want them becoming to dizzy whilst flying.

But is an interesting study, it could explain the building blocks of our foundations being built before hand, you know foundations forming over billions of years, through gravitational pull befor the earth is layed.

Sorry had to get that one in

 

[Magenta]

You are 3 pillars short of a full earth. Your version doesn't have but 1 leg to stand on.

With four elephants standing on the back of a turtle, wouldn't/shouldn't that be 16 pillars? .

 

[Cameron143]

View attachment 253057

With four elephants standing on the back of a turtle, wouldn't/shouldn't that be 16 pillars? .

If they are wooly mammoths I might buy it. I'm not sure regular elephants can stand the frigid cold of the ice walls they are supporting.

 

[GaryA]

But is an interesting study, it could explain the building blocks of our foundations being built before hand, you know foundations forming over billions of years, through gravitational pull befor the earth is layed.

God spoke everything into existence. And, He did not need billions of years to form the foundations.

 

[GaryA]

Please post a picture of a group of satellites in space.

Or, even one - that is an in-focus real actual honest bona fide unretouched picture of a satellite in space. (verifiably "in space" of course)

check out elon musks group

Satellites don't exist.

if you don't have ACCESS to elon musks groups, then you are a nobody.

Oh, now this is very telling...

and for me to listen to a NOBODY, about flat earth, is as RETARDED as it GETS!!

Then, why are you being so retarded?

musk defense satellite can literally be 10 [TEN] earth orbits AWAY and still read the face of a dime off a sidewalk from ground level.

If you will just think about this long enough, you should realize why it cannot be true. (It really is quite absurd.)

Have you ever actually tried to prove to yourself - with real physics - the stuff you believe?

i don't have permission to post defense pictures.

Why do you think you should have to?

If the Ball Earth model were true, there would be hundreds-if-not-thousands of pictures of the whole earth from space in the public domain. Why is there not even one?

If the Ball Earth model were true, there would be hundreds-if-not-thousands of pictures of satellites from space in the public domain. Why is there not even one?

Why is everything we see that NASA puts forth an "artist rendering" instead of an in-focus real actual honest bona fide unretouched picture?

If we have cameras that can read the face of a dime from 10 earth orbits away ( ) - why can we not take in-focus real actual honest bona fide unretouched pictures of satellites in space from earth?

 

[GaryA]

ill show you a perfect example of a common satellite view, that, could ONLY come from a satellite.

Let's see it!

the days of bi-plane images are long gone.

That's right - they have been doing it with military jet aircraft for some time now...

but, enter any address, and you will get a conglomerate view of hundreds of pictures in a fluid image of the address property, land, even what's near it from homes to business.

That is the fly-over method - totally meaningless for proof of satellites.

it's way to easy to prove proof of satellite without going defense mode.

Yet, it is most difficult for anyone to "go beyond" just talking about it and actually put forth this "easy proof"...

 

[GaryA]

Not being able to post pix of satellites is not proof the earth is flat.

Perhaps not; however, it does very highly suggest by default that there are no satellites in space.

Because, if there were satellites in space - we would have hundreds-if-not-thousands of pictures of them in the public domain.

And, if there are no satellites in space - we most certainly are being lied to in the worst possible way about something [major].

 

[GaryA]

I believe in a God whose grandness is capable of producing the kind of universe that astronomers from Galileo on up have described. A universe so terrifying large, with billions (if not more) galaxies -- GALAXIES, not just stars!!! -- in a space at least in the billions of light years wide... Just trying to fathom 500 light years one night started to terrify me. It's HHUUUUUUGGGGGEE!!!!!! Too big for human comprehension. Imagine the flippin' galaxy!!! And, then the distance to our nearest galactic neighbors!!! Never mind across the known universe!!

God is GOD. He is quite capable of producing a universe of incomprehensibly more grandeur than that stupid, infantile flat earth / dome nonsense.

I believe that God is capable of doing anything He wants to do. And, whatever He might choose to do would be 'grand' - there is no doubt. However, I also believe that what God has actually created has a kind of 'grandeur' that is greater than the 'vast universe' idea.

What will really blow your mind - and 'terrify' you - is when you discover just how easy it was for Satan to deceive the whole world...

 

[GaryA]

Would love to see some Gary.

I am thinking you have already seen some - pretty sure that most every FE related thread has had some of those pictures posted. Have you not been looking at those?

 

[Moses_Young]

The sun rising and setting from/to below a flat horizon. An eclipse of the moon. Earthbound pics of shadows in directions impossible on a North-centric flat Earth.

Like I said before, these are not really direct observations of curvature - but rather are observations of the Heavenly bodies and an extrapolation of the Heliocentric theories behind these to support (surprise, surprise!) Heliocentricity.

As has been explained to death, the sun rising and setting is explained by perspective. There was a post on one of these threads at altitude, which showed the sun simply disappearing at height above the horizon. Consistent with Flat Earth and perspective as the cause of sunrise and sunset - not consistent with Heliocentricity and the "curvature of the Earth" being the cause of sunrise and sunset.

As for eclipses, Heliocentricity can't explain these itself. The shadow on the Earth caused by a solar eclipse being thinner than the object (the moon) itself? Unheard of in any scientific demonstration of the principle (shadows are always larger than the object casting the shadow). A selenelion, where the moon is supposed to be in the Earth's shadow, but yet where both sun and moon are visible above the horizon? Again, the excuse that this is diffraction or some effect of light doesn't cut it.

I'm not really interested in arguing on the theories behind the heavenly bodies, because I'm unaware of either Flat Earth or Heliocentricity being able to adequately describe the real life phenomena. It's like trying to prove something based on a demonstrably flawed theory - sort of if Dawkins were to try to use Evolutionary theory to prove the Big Bang theory.

As I said to you before, my observation is that there is no curvature. This is consistent with every real piece of science we have. For Heliocentric theory to even be considered, it's gotta have proof, and all it's got are the fraudulent data from NASA and its ilk.

 

[Fundaamental]

Perhaps not; however, it does very highly suggest by default that there are no satellites in space.

Because, if there were satellites in space - we would have hundreds-if-not-thousands of pictures of them in the public domain.

And, if there are no satellites in space - we most certainly are being lied to in the worst possible way about something [major].

Gary satellites do not stay in the same place, they orbit the earth at high speed it's impossible to get more than one satellite into view with a lens from extremely large telescopes to capture it , as the distance of each satellite is far apart and either closer to earth or further away. The lens has to be zoomed in on one satellite to capture it.


Quite often satellites are only captured from a space station in full view one at a time.

Satellites that are closest to earth you can see them with a telescope, but you have to know where to look, But they just come back as a flashing light on my telescope, kinda like seeing a plane at night with naked eye, all you see is a tiny light flashing

There are satellite that orbit with the rotation of the earth but there so far away. You need James web to see them.

Thanks, busy else where now

 

[Sipsey]

Once again I ask, why is this not in the Conspiracy Forum (where it belongs) instead of the Bible Forum.

 

[Fundaamental]

Once again I ask, why is this not in the Conspiracy Forum (where it belongs) instead of the Bible Forum.

apparently the earth being a sphere or not is a matter of salvation.

If you believe the earth is a sphere, then your favouring NASA who have the mark of the beast 666.

But yet a person can only know that there saved.

my observation is people like to push buttons.

 

[Moses_Young]

Once again I ask, why is this not in the Conspiracy Forum (where it belongs) instead of the Bible Forum.

The bible is pretty straightforward in its description of the Earth being flat. Certainly no support in scripture for any Heliocentric, Satanic lie. Why should this not be in Bible Discussion, unless you're scared of the truth finding a wider audience?

 

[Dino246]

Perhaps not; however, it does very highly suggest by default that there are no satellites in space.

Because, if there were satellites in space - we would have hundreds-if-not-thousands of pictures of them in the public domain.

And, if there are no satellites in space - we most certainly are being lied to in the worst possible way about something [major].

You're overlooking a rather important detail: generally, satellites are not set up to take photographs of other satellites, but rather of the earth or some other feature.

 

[Fundaamental]

You're overlooking a rather important detail: generally, satellites are not set up to take photographs of other satellites, but rather of the earth or some other feature.

agreed most satellites are set up for communication.

Satellites that are set up for observation will be generally spy satellites focused in on earth's ground, there not going to reveal there pictures either,

Google earth satellite which uses the Landsat program does but only passes over the same spot of earth every 16 days, but blots out all identification of people's faces and number plates.

The security aspects of theese satellites and location are strictly confidential. Due to spy satellites

 

[Sipsey]

The bible is pretty straightforward in its description of the Earth being flat. Certainly no support in scripture for any Heliocentric, Satanic lie. Why should this not be in Bible Discussion, unless you're scared of the truth finding a wider audience?

Nah, I simply take the advice of my Savior when it comes to being a scairdy cat. “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.”

I just wonder what the end game is of this incessant flat earth garbage.

 

[RaceRunner]

Gary satellites do not stay in the same place, they orbit the earth at high speed it's impossible to get more than one satellite into view with a lens from extremely large telescopes to capture it , as the distance of each satellite is far apart and either closer to earth or further away. The lens has to be zoomed in on one satellite to capture it.


Quite often satellites are only captured from a space station in full view one at a time.

Satellites that are closest to earth you can see them with a telescope, but you have to know where to look, But they just come back as a flashing light on my telescope, kinda like seeing a plane at night with naked eye, all you see is a tiny light flashing

There are satellite that orbit with the rotation of the earth but there so far away. You need James web to see them.

Thanks, busy else where now

Just post a picture of a satellite or a group of satellites in space.