All Rivers Run to the Sea. Which Poll Option in This Thread is Correct?
- Thread starter Deliverances
- 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.
Water finds its own level.View attachment 174805 View attachment 174806 so why don't all rivers run towards the north pole?
Yup and level is not the same thing as flat. Flatness is independent of any local physical field; it's a geometric description. Level is an intrinsically physical measurement ; it's a description entirely dependent on local gravitational field strength.
You - like every flat disciple does - are making the mistake of trying to argue about geometric and physical principles that you don't have a sound understanding of, and because of that you're tripping over vocabulary that you don't really know the definition of.
Level on either a disc or a sphere is not a constant gradient field. On a sphere, observation matches prediction perfectly. On a disc, it doesn't. The model you're trying to deceive us all with predicts that the further south we go, the more we lean over, so that people and structures in Australia naturally stand almost vertical with respect to the earth's surface, and a dropped ball always falls due north. Obviously false.
Your bullet-proof argument just got hit with a bomb, dude.
good post, the dropping of a ball is interesting, If a person standing directly on the South Pole dropped a ball, to the person it would appear by observation to be of a downward motion, but the person can't percieve they are actually standing upside down because Gravity is pulling/holding them down on earth.
If a person could actually witness that from a distance from earth and see the person at the South Pole drop a ball it would look kind of abnormal to see a upside down person drop a ball and that ball would look to be moving up to the earth because of gravity.
H
Huckleberry
Guest
A whole new level of stupid.
Before someone tries to "educate" others concerning geologic models,
you'd think they'd educate themselves concerning basic physics.
Before someone tries to "educate" others concerning geologic models,
you'd think they'd educate themselves concerning basic physics.
Aye, and if the earth were a disc, anywhere you stood other than the north pole, if you drop a ball it would take off sideways. The further south you are, the more sideways, so that if you were at the south pole it would 'fall' almost completely horizontal!
So ppl who would rather believe in flat earth than facts, if they reach this level of comprehension, start saying there's no such thing as gravity; it's all buoyancy...
...which is hilarious, because buoyancy is by definition a derived property of mass being affected by.. Guess what?
Gravity.
That's the whole 'don't actually have a clue what the words they are using mean' thing again.
Aye, and if the earth were a disc, anywhere you stood other than the north pole, if you drop a ball it would take off sideways. The further south you are, the more sideways, so that if you were at the south pole it would 'fall' almost completely horizontal!
So ppl who would rather believe in flat earth than facts, if they reach this level of comprehension, start saying there's no such thing as gravity; it's all buoyancy...
...which is hilarious, because buoyancy is by definition a derived property of mass being affected by.. Guess what?
Gravity.
That's the whole 'don't actually have a clue what the words they are using mean' thing again.
Would it move sideways, I guess that would be dependent on where the source of gravity is, if it is under a flat earth I'd assumed everything would fall south, if the gravity force is pulling from the side I'd assume then yes it would pull to the side.
I know the flat earth belief is a strange one, as we know they get that from the mentioning of (circle and round) in the bible, well that is true the basics is all that is given about it.
But in my opinion it was for reason, God is teaching us about the basic fundamentals of human eye function, example when we look at the moon, it only really appears to be a circle and round because we are at a certain distance from it and can't really get the perspective of a Full 3D sphere that it is, we can not see the back side of the sphere so our minds can't percieve it as such and adjusts the eye vision as needed.
that's how the eye perception works, the human eye goes back and forth from the middle of 2D/3D view and swings in either direction either in full 3D mode or full 2D mode and any range of that in between depending mostly on three things (height width and circumference) of the object a ball triangle or square. The mind needs these visual measurements to comprehend to shape of the object.
little micro people like us standing on a huge ball can't percieve the basic 3 measurements, that is why the horizon appears to be flat while standing on the ground yet the more a person travels away from the earth the other 3 measurements can be percieved and the actual appearance of the object can be rightly seen.
Last edited:
(Ecclesiastes 1:6-8): ...The Voice (VOICE)
6 The wind in its travels blows toward the south, then swings back around to the north. Back and forth, returning in its circuit again and again. 7 All rivers flow to the sea, but the sea is never full. To the place where the rivers flow, there the water returns to flow once again. 8 Words, words, words! So many words! They are wearisome things; and yet people cannot refrain from speaking. No eye has ever surveyed the world and said, “I have seen enough”; no ear has ever listened to creation and said, “I have heard enough.”
6 The wind in its travels blows toward the south, then swings back around to the north. Back and forth, returning in its circuit again and again. 7 All rivers flow to the sea, but the sea is never full. To the place where the rivers flow, there the water returns to flow once again. 8 Words, words, words! So many words! They are wearisome things; and yet people cannot refrain from speaking. No eye has ever surveyed the world and said, “I have seen enough”; no ear has ever listened to creation and said, “I have heard enough.”
this is the way things 'were', not so 'today',..the terrarium that Jesus built for us and
all things that breathe to live-in and prosper, has gone the way of carnal man's mind
and desires, for greed/destruction have brought us all to the brink of destruction...
read the 'prophets'...
our once lush and over-flowing gardens of the wild have been 'plundered and raped' -
sawn-asunder: how can the natural rhythms of the natural world proceed to give life?
they cannot, for they have been poisoned/eaten/depleted on the plate of the world...
all things that breathe to live-in and prosper, has gone the way of carnal man's mind
and desires, for greed/destruction have brought us all to the brink of destruction...
read the 'prophets'...
our once lush and over-flowing gardens of the wild have been 'plundered and raped' -
sawn-asunder: how can the natural rhythms of the natural world proceed to give life?
they cannot, for they have been poisoned/eaten/depleted on the plate of the world...
as far as anyone knows, the source of gravity is mass - or something intrinsic to mass, at a more fundamental level.
the vector of gravitational forces always points toward the center of mass; on a disc, the center of mass is the center of the disc. on pancake-planet, the center of mass would be at the north pole, midway through whatever the thickness is, which flat-disciples say is negligible ((otherwise they'd be saying the earth is a cylinder)).
Maybe instead of the North Pole on a flat earth it is actually the South Pole. Regardless, it seems to me that the North and South poles would be diametrically opposed to each other. That would place either of the poles on the bottom of the flat earth. Of course, none of the flat-liners have ever seen what is on the bottom of the flat earth or have even been to the edges of the flat earth so as to provide descriptive relative measurements or physical observations.
Only on a sphere earth can a person travel east or west on the equator and never have to change direction straight ahead endlessly without veering left or right and still be traveling east or west the same with north and south but that would be going north then south then north then south endlessly, of coarse that would require a boat, plane,car etc. but nonetheless can be done today no problem well with the cash to do it of coarse, hahaha.