Flat Earth Controversy - A Challenge to Spherical's Cosmology

  • Thread starter Thread starter William86
  • Start date 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
JosephsDreams said:
The bible said their was a firmament (of ice) at one time, which was a factor in increased longevity, and/also protection from x-rays and who knows what else, but that was demolished in the cataclysmic event we call the flood.
Click to expand...

I was just wondering where the idea the firmament was composed of ice and the idea that it was demolished during the flood came from. What passages is this interpretation based on? I feel like it is hard to reconcile this idea with stars and other celestial bodies being fixed in the firmament. The word translated as firmament seems to refer to something that has been beaten out, like metal being beaten flat, so I've always seen this as something like a large metallic dome holding back a layer of water above it.
 
This is da way I see it:
1. Spherical is a troll.
2. Don't feed the trolls.
3. Those who feed trolls deserve what they get.

Simple, yes?
 
William86 said:
I was just wondering where the idea the firmament was composed of ice and the idea that it was demolished during the flood came from. What passages is this interpretation based on? I feel like it is hard to reconcile this idea with stars and other celestial bodies being fixed in the firmament. The word translated as firmament seems to refer to something that has been beaten out, like metal being beaten flat, so I've always seen this as something like a large metallic dome holding back a layer of water above it.
Click to expand...

The word firmament has multiple meanings in different languages though one thing for sure firmament is tangible.
 
Spherical,

I am new to this flat earth concept. I checked out the link you list but it wasn't very helpful. Are you denying the validity of logic and science, or are you saying that there is scientific evidence that is being withheld?

Firstly, I have seen a number of videos where a camera was attached to a balloon and sent up above 90,000 feet. The balloon bursts and the camera parachutes back to earth. A search on youtube for "high altitude balloon" turned up over 55,000 videos. One can clearly see the curvature of the earth in these videos.

Respectfully, how do you explain this phenomenon?

A second question I have about your belief is why do airliners take the "great circle" route when traveling long distances. They would not do that if the earth were flat.

Also, one can actually determine the size of the earth's sphere by measuring the angle of a stick at noon at two different latitudes. This is one of many ways the ancients knew the earth was a sphere 2,000 years ago. They even created a "computer" now called the Antikythera device that used this calculation and was then able to calculate the earth's relationship to the moon and planets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism

Lastly, the trade winds are a direct result of the earth's rotation. That must also be explained if the world is flat.

These are sincere questions and I am giving you the benefit of the doubt at the moment. Are you able to explain these phenomena according to a flat earth cosmology?

Thank you.
 
Spherical, I've noticed while reading through your thread (I have read the entire thread) that you do not seem to respond to people who ask you to explain easily observable things that would indicate you are wrong. At the same time each example you have provided has been adequately explained using a spherical model of the earth. After it has been explained you then repeatedly ask for an explanation of the same example. Perhaps this suggests that you do not have a reasonable justification for your views which is why you must rely on quotations and youtube videos to support your beliefs.
 
William86 said:
Spherical, I've noticed while reading through your thread (I have read the entire thread) that you do not seem to respond to people who ask you to explain easily observable things that would indicate you are wrong. At the same time each example you have provided has been adequately explained using a spherical model of the earth. After it has been explained you then repeatedly ask for an explanation of the same example. Perhaps this suggests that you do not have a reasonable justification for your views which is why you must rely on quotations and youtube videos to support your beliefs.
Click to expand...

There is no earth curvature.

 

Anyone can prove the sea-horizon perfectly straight and the entire Earth perfectly flat using nothing more than a level, tripods and a wooden plank. At any altitude above sea-level, simply fix a 6-12 foot long, smooth, leveled board edgewise upon tripods and observe the skyline from eye-level behind it. The distant horizon will always align perfectly parallel with the upper edge of the board. Furthermore, if you move in a half-circle from one end of the board to the other whilst observing the skyline over the upper edge, you will be able to trace a clear, flat 10-20 miles depending on your altitude. This would be impossible if the Earth were a globe 25,000 miles in circumference; the horizon would align over the center of the board but then gradually, noticeably decline towards the extremities. Just ten miles on each side would necessitate an easily visible curvature of 66.6 feet from each end to the center.
 
Spherical said:
[video=youtube;3gNkgj9h2oM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gNkgj9h2oM[/video]
Click to expand...

Ok, I'm legitimately confused now... You've begun posting youtube videos that are arguing against your own position which offer information that is exactly like what I said as an explanation for why your helicopter explanation is wrong?! I'm starting to wonder if you've ever even watched the videos you post.
 
William86 said:
Ok, I'm legitimately confused now... You've begun posting youtube videos that are arguing against your own position which offer information that is exactly like what I said as an explanation for why your helicopter explanation is wrong?! I'm starting to wonder if you've ever even watched the videos you post.
Click to expand...

I am proving to you how messed up people are with math if they think planes can fly against the earth's supposed over 1,000 mph rotation.
 
Spherical said:
I am proving to you how messed up people are with math if they think planes can fly against the earth's supposed over 1,000 mph rotation.
Click to expand...

It's not messed up math, it's called galilean relativity. There is no such thing as an absolute velocity in physics, the velocity an object is traveling is measured relative to another object. When you say that the edge of the earth is traveling at 1000 mph, you're measuring it relative to the center of the earth. This means all objects on the surface are traveling 1000 mph relative to the center of the earth, but relative to the surface of the ground they are moving with a velocity of 0.
 
William86 said:
It's not messed up math, it's called galilean relativity. There is no such thing as an absolute velocity in physics, the velocity an object is traveling is measured relative to another object. When you say that the edge of the earth is traveling at 1000 mph, you're measuring it relative to the center of the earth. This means all objects on the surface are traveling 1000 mph relative to the center of the earth, but relative to the surface of the ground they are moving with a velocity of 0.
Click to expand...

[h=2]Speed of commercial airplane[/h]

Typical cruising air speed for long-distance commercial passenger flights is 475–500 knots (878-926 km/h; 546–575 mph).
 
Spherical said:
Speed of commercial airplane
Typical cruising air speed for long-distance commercial passenger flights is 475–500 knots (878-926 km/h; 546–575 mph).
Click to expand...

How does this show what I said was incorrect? I know that planes travel at this speed. I mean this with all sincerity, I think you may have some kind of mental illness because your reasoning is very similar to someone experiencing a psychotic breakdown.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back