200 Proofs Earth Is Not A Spinning Ball Videobook By Eric Dubay

[BeyondET]

It the earth is rotating as you claim it does, it depends on which direction you are traveling.

Yes I agree the planes thrust is adjusted many times throughout its flight depending on height weight and desired speed the plane can travel either way but is using different HP to achieve the same speed at a level traveling height off the ground. Flying a plane is not just turning on the engine and go just like traveling in a car on a highway the throttle is always being adjusted to maintian a safe travel speed this is also true of planes. To get a plane off of the ground takes a lot of force because it's a plane its heavy and takes a lot of force to resist gravity but once in the air and traveling at the speed to maintain flight the wind is a factor no doubt but without man made thrust on the heavy plane doesn't have a chance to stay aloft unless it's a glider some can go far depending on size wieght aurodynamics and wind direct and speed.

Because the earths air is inside of the atmosphere bubble of the earth it is traveling at the same speed as the earth is though there are elements that cause air to move faster then a 1000 miles a hour within the bubble a example would be like standing on a marry go round(earth) a person(air)standing on it is chewing gum and then spits out the piece of gum while the marry go round is spinning the gum isn't going to hit you right when it comes out of your mouth. No because the speed is created by a person which the gum is shot out faster then the marry go round is spinning.

 

[William86]

MY INFORMATION THAT THE EARTH IS A CIRCLE AND NOT A GLOBE HAS BEEN REVEALED TO ME BY GOD IN THE HOLY BIBLE.

The ironic thing is that I totally agree with you that the bible portrays the earth exactly as you describe it. I actually would like to say that I appreciate that you are truly consistent with the bible on that point.

 

[William86]

Spherical the argument tactic you're using is called the "Gish Gallop". You essentially just spew forth a constant stream of small arguments (often fabricated) that are totally unsubstantiated faster than is possible to refute them. It's what people are reduced to doing when they can't actually argue their position.

 

[_nitro]

If sailing around the southern ocean is the quickest route around the world, why is the circumference so big compared to the equator?

 

[William86]

If sailing around the southern ocean is the quickest route around the world, why is the circumference so big compared to the equator?

It's not a larger circumference than the equator. Does that answer your question?

 

[BeyondET]

It's not a true prefect round sphere,, the circumference of a ocean is just that a ocean circle layed out on a circle earth. the equator is a straight line named that equator and the line is around the earth all lines that have been invented which for that matter are straight lines but the one line that is in the center closet to the sun is called that.

 

[RickyZ]

Don't feed the bears.

 

[posthuman]

The establishment claims the Midnight Sun IS experienced in Antarctica but they conveniently do not have any uncut videos showing this, nor do they allow independent explorers to travel to Antarctica during the winter solstice to verify or refute these claims. Conversely, there are dozens of uncut videos publicly available showing the Arctic Midnight Sun and it has been verified beyond any shadow of a doubt.

LOL!!

first you say "midnight sun" is evidence for flat earth, and now you say "midnight sun" doesn't exist and is a conspiracy?

anyway, you're "flat" wrong again. your idol lied to you.
here's a 24-hr continuous timelapse video of the sun in the antarctic sky.

enjoy!

[video=youtube;Zc-WlTaG7WY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zc-WlTaG7WY[/video]

 

[posthuman]

same video, better quality:

[video=youtube;BgZa9oZDN5g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgZa9oZDN5g[/video]

 

[posthuman]

Spherical the argument tactic you're using is called the "Gish Gallop". You essentially just spew forth a constant stream of small arguments (often fabricated) that are totally unsubstantiated faster than is possible to refute them. It's what people are reduced to doing when they can't actually argue their position.

hmm, ne'er heard that term before.

what's it called when someone actually bothers to refute great swaths of these fabricated & unsubstantiated arguments, but a person just "gallops by" the clear debunking, ignoring all the evidence contrary to his spew? is there a word for that?

thanks

 

[William86]

hmm, ne'er heard that term before.

what's it called when someone actually bothers to refute great swaths of these fabricated & unsubstantiated arguments, but a person just "gallops by" the clear debunking, ignoring all the evidence contrary to his spew? is there a word for that?

thanks

I believe it's called a stress induced heart attack.

 

[Spherical]

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."

 

[EarnestQ]

To the other posters,


I am convinced that Spherical's motivation for arguing this position are not “rational”. By this I mean that he (she?) does not believe the earth is flat because it is logically or scientifically consistent, or that there is any true evidence for it.


It may be that the person really does know the earth is spherical (thus his nick name) but is isolated and is using this concept as an excuse to interact with others on something that is not personally threatening.


Another significant possibility is that the person is delusional and truly believes what he/she is claiming. In this case it is impossible to reason with such a person. It may be the result of a mental illness or demonic deception. In either case, the person cannot “reasoned with” until the true cause of the problem is dealt with.


Another possibility is that the person is simply (demonically?) contentious and has confused emotional reasons for making outrageous comments.


In all of these cases, I doubt there is any productive reason for trying to reason with him about whether the earth is flat or spherical. Either, he can't accept the truth of the matter, or he already knows it and has other motivations for pretending to take that position.


I get the impression that many of the responders are actually trying to help Spherical reason through his position. I suggest that we waste no more time at this.


Perhaps we can identify what he really needs, such as true human emotional interaction and address that need. But in all cases, I suggest we pray for him (her?) because trying to reason with him in his own confusion is truly pointless as shown by his responses in this thread.


If he is sincere, only God can reach into his delusion and heal him. If he is not sincere, only God can reach into his heart and meet the need that shows up in this symptom of pretending to argue the earth is flat.

 

[BeyondET]

To the other posters,


I am convinced that Spherical's motivation for arguing this position are not “rational”. By this I mean that he (she?) does not believe the earth is flat because it is logically or scientifically consistent, or that there is any true evidence for it.


It may be that the person really does know the earth is spherical (thus his nick name) but is isolated and is using this concept as an excuse to interact with others on something that is not personally threatening.


Another significant possibility is that the person is delusional and truly believes what he/she is claiming. In this case it is impossible to reason with such a person. It may be the result of a mental illness or demonic deception. In either case, the person cannot “reasoned with” until the true cause of the problem is dealt with.


Another possibility is that the person is simply (demonically?) contentious and has confused emotional reasons for making outrageous comments.


In all of these cases, I doubt there is any productive reason for trying to reason with him about whether the earth is flat or spherical. Either, he can't accept the truth of the matter, or he already knows it and has other motivations for pretending to take that position.


I get the impression that many of the responders are actually trying to help Spherical reason through his position. I suggest that we waste no more time at this.


Perhaps we can identify what he really needs, such as true human emotional interaction and address that need. But in all cases, I suggest we pray for him (her?) because trying to reason with him in his own confusion is truly pointless as shown by his responses in this thread.


If he is sincere, only God can reach into his delusion and heal him. If he is not sincere, only God can reach into his heart and meet the need that shows up in this symptom of pretending to argue the earth is flat.

great post a lot of what you said is true in life I agree. In the matter of conversation if the isolation part is true and the conversation is just about emotional interaction rather it's flat or sphere. Then the reasoning is a after thought compared to being isolated.

 

[William86]

Originally Posted by AuntieAnt
Time is an illusion. Solids are illusion. What we think is a physical material world isn't really physical or material at all. Everything that we perceive as real is made up of things that we don't regard as real. The universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what is visible. So what difference does it make whether we perceive the world as flat or round?

The only thing that makes absolute sense to me is to "only believe" Jesus, as he says and not put my trust in my own logical understanding.

So my question is this: Are you factoring God in this flat earth equation? And if so, how?

What you posted above is why I believe the earth is a circle and not a globe. I am putting my trust in the eternal word of God instead of my own logical understanding.

What you posted above is why I believe the earth is a circle and not a globe. I am putting my trust in the eternal word of God instead of my own logical understanding.

I think Spherical is sincere in his beliefs and I think the statement he made above shows why he believes this to be true. He starts with the assumption that the bible is inerrant, then he systematically rejects any idea that contradicts his interpretation of scripture. In his case however he does not disregard passages that explicitly portray the earth as flat with a dome firmament holding back waters. I think a strong case can be made that the bible does suggest a theory of the world that is consistent with what Spherical is arguing for. Is this really so different from the stance taken by many YEC that the earth is 6000 years old? They also invoke a global scientific conspiracy that is trying to suppress their views and so any scientific evidence that contradicts their view of scripture can be attributed to some kind of atheistic plot.

The same argumentation tactic he has been using is also a common tactic of YEC, the Ken Ham debate was a good example of this. The main difference here is that what Spherical believes can be very very easily disproved because it is a fairly simple and straightforward subject matter. He also seems to be mentally ill so his reasoning can take the form of very bizarre beliefs that any YEC who is honest with themselves cannot accept. Both arguments however amount to an extended begging the question fallacy that looks something like the following, the bible is inerrant, the bible supports my idea, therefore my idea is correct, therefore any argument against me cannot be science, therefore remove these ideas from science, the science that remains therefore supports the bible, therefore science shows my idea is correct.

 

[BeyondET]

I think Spherical is sincere in his beliefs and I think the statement he made above shows why he believes this to be true. He starts with the assumption that the bible is inerrant, then he systematically rejects any idea that contradicts his interpretation of scripture. In his case however he does not disregard passages that explicitly portray the earth as flat with a dome firmament holding back waters. I think a strong case can be made that the bible does suggest a theory of the world that is consistent with what Spherical is arguing for. Is this really so different from the stance taken by many YEC that the earth is 6000 years old? They also invoke a global scientific conspiracy that is trying to suppress their views and so any scientific evidence that contradicts their view of scripture can be attributed to some kind of atheistic plot.

The same argumentation tactic he has been using is also a common tactic of YEC, the Ken Ham debate was a good example of this. The main difference here is that what Spherical believes can be very very easily disproved because it is a fairly simple and straightforward subject matter. He also seems to be mentally ill so his reasoning can take the form of very bizarre beliefs that any YEC who is honest with themselves cannot accept. Both arguments however amount to an extended begging the question fallacy that looks something like the following, the bible is inerrant, the bible supports my idea, therefore my idea is correct, therefore any argument against me cannot be science, therefore remove these ideas from science, the science that remains therefore supports the bible, therefore science shows my idea is correct.

i find it all kind of ironic take minutes and seconds how people believe in these time scales and how much does scripture verses talk about it.

 

[Spherical]

Quoting "Earth Not a Globe!" by Samuel Rowbotham, "
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]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.[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][/FONT][/FONT]"

 

[Spherical]

Also Quoting Dr. Rowbotham, "
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]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[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][/FONT][/FONT]."

 

[Spherical]

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.

 

[BeyondET]

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."

This is interesting though his findings were based on a ship in the water with waves moving the ship up and down would never had been a solid point of reference and tides too always moving in and out changing elevations