NASA and Facebook tricked you

[Rens]

If the earth is flat then logically there has to either be a literal "end of the world" where you can't go any further. If the earth is essentially spherical then it makes sense that taking a succession of short steps might allow us to move from the European mainland to Iceland to Greenland to Canada to the US mainland to Hawaii to Japan to China etc. If the earth is flat you'd need to figure where they all are relative to each other such that every single distance between them works.

If the earth is flat, presumably it would have to have land all around the outside, or the oceans would flow off the edge. Presumably at some point someone somewhere would be able to stand at the edge and shout "hey look, it doesn't go any further, this round earth idea is a crock". Anyone would be able to go to the edge to see it for themselves, maybe take photos. Are there any such photos?

If the earth is flat then surely there would be more useful evidence than "hey, some guy made a video, therefore it's true".

They say it's surrounded by ice. Hey that's a good one. Global warming and melting icecaps would be a disaster, the oceans would get empty or is there gravity at the edges?

 

[tango]

They say it's surrounded by ice. Hey that's a good one. Global warming and melting icecaps would be a disaster, the oceans would get empty or is there gravity at the edges?

So the arctic and antarctic are the same place, and form a big ring around the earth? Hey, maybe it forms a giant circle with a little gap in it, so the oceans can overflow if they get too full.

 

[Rens]

According to Vlichtus the Bible says the earth is hollow and the sun is inside. I can't find it in English.

http://vlichthus.nl/17-het-bijbels-wereldbeeld/

Oh here: solid proof!

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=61088.0

 

[Stravinsk]

If the earth is flat then logically there has to either be a literal "end of the world" where you can't go any further. If the earth is essentially spherical then it makes sense that taking a succession of short steps might allow us to move from the European mainland to Iceland to Greenland to Canada to the US mainland to Hawaii to Japan to China etc. If the earth is flat you'd need to figure where they all are relative to each other such that every single distance between them works.

If the earth is flat, presumably it would have to have land all around the outside, or the oceans would flow off the edge. Presumably at some point someone somewhere would be able to stand at the edge and shout "hey look, it doesn't go any further, this round earth idea is a crock". Anyone would be able to go to the edge to see it for themselves, maybe take photos. Are there any such photos?

If the earth is flat then surely there would be more useful evidence than "hey, some guy made a video, therefore it's true".

Regarding your last statement - I provided a link to Eric Dubay's book a few pages back. It's free - did you download it?

Regarding reaching the edge - two problems:

1) Anyone who tries to will be stopped by reason of an International treaty set in place in the late 1950's. It's been signed by multiple nations since. Various governments of the world do not want anyone going there.

2) Sure - you can visit what they say is Antarctica on their map - but the Antarctica that is depicted on Flat Earth maps (which, incidentally the UN uses for the main continents...trying finding Antarctica on it!) you can't go to, and according to the accounts of Admiral Richard E. Byrd, it's walled off by huge sheets of ice.

 

[Rens]

Regarding your last statement - I provided a link to Eric Dubay's book a few pages back. It's free - did you download it?

Regarding reaching the edge - two problems:

1) Anyone who tries to will be stopped by reason of an International treaty set in place in the late 1950's. It's been signed by multiple nations since. Various governments of the world do not want anyone going there.

2) Sure - you can visit what they say is Antarctica on their map - but the Antarctica that is depicted on Flat Earth maps (which, incidentally the UN uses for the main continents...trying finding Antarctica on it!) you can't go to, and according to the accounts of Admiral Richard E. Byrd, it's walled off by huge sheets of ice.

I just read in Visionary's thread that the pope secretly visits.

 

[tango]

Regarding your last statement - I provided a link to Eric Dubay's book a few pages back. It's free - did you download it?

Regarding reaching the edge - two problems:

1) Anyone who tries to will be stopped by reason of an International treaty set in place in the late 1950's. It's been signed by multiple nations since. Various governments of the world do not want anyone going there.

2) Sure - you can visit what they say is Antarctica on their map - but the Antarctica that is depicted on Flat Earth maps (which, incidentally the UN uses for the main continents...trying finding Antarctica on it!) you can't go to, and according to the accounts of Admiral Richard E. Byrd, it's walled off by huge sheets of ice.

I didn't have chance to download the book, I've been working for most of the day.

What will stop people from trying to reach the edge? The treaty alone won't stop them, a treaty is just a piece of paper with words on it. Is there a big wall, an electric forcefield, or something else?

One other question, if there is such a huge conspiracy to hide the fact that the earth is flat rather than round, what does anybody have to gain from fooling the masses?

 

[Stravinsk]

I didn't have chance to download the book, I've been working for most of the day.

What will stop people from trying to reach the edge? The treaty alone won't stop them, a treaty is just a piece of paper with words on it. Is there a big wall, an electric forcefield, or something else?

One other question, if there is such a huge conspiracy to hide the fact that the earth is flat rather than round, what does anybody have to gain from fooling the masses?

Book - I encourage you to download it while it's free (I don't expect that will change anytime soon but it might)

Stop people from going to edge? Multiple government armed forces enforcing International treaty. Not to mention I don't think it's practical for most people to even try, given the harsh conditions.

The answer to your last question is complicated. Here is one of the best answers I have come across (and happen to agree with), you'll have to watch a video, sorry - short (just under 4 minutes):

 

[Rens]

http://dl0.creation.com/articles/p116/c11646/toronto.gif

 

[Rens]

Book - I encourage you to download it while it's free (I don't expect that will change anytime soon but it might)

Stop people from going to edge? Multiple government armed forces enforcing International treaty. Not to mention I don't think it's practical for most people to even try, given the harsh conditions.

The answer to your last question is complicated. Here is one of the best answers I have come across (and happen to agree with), you'll have to watch a video, sorry - short (just under 4 minutes):

= no gravity??

 

[Stravinsk]

http://dl0.creation.com/articles/p116/c11646/toronto.gif

View attachment 616

And if you zoom in with a high powered camera or binoculars, it all comes back.

Could have saved you the time if you had only watched the 2nd video I posted.

But I guess ignorance is bliss.

 

[MarkFL]

= no gravity??

If I'm not mistaken, the flat Earth model says that the disk we live on is accelerating through space at about 9.8 m/s[sup]2[/sup], thereby giving the illusion of gravity. We would therefore be traveling at nearly 150 times the speed of light by now.

 

[Rens]

If I'm not mistaken, the flat Earth model says that the disk we live on is accelerating through space at about 9.8 m/s[sup]2[/sup], thereby giving the illusion of gravity.

Oh okay and one Biblical proof text is that the earth doesn't move, hmm.

 

[Stravinsk]

= no gravity??

Don't listen to me, Rens. They're still figuring out how gravity manages to hold vast oceans around a globe spinning over 1000mph, while letting birds, and small insects defy it, keep the moon from being swallowed up by the Sun's gravitational pull while holding all those planets in orbit - lolololz...

Mate - you need to ask one of those really smart people like Tyson who thinks the earth is a pear shape!

 

[Stravinsk]

If I'm not mistaken, the flat Earth model says that the disk we live on is accelerating through space at about 9.8 m/s[sup]2[/sup], thereby giving the illusion of gravity.

You are mistaken. That is the controlled opposition that is the official "Flat earth Society".

 

[MarkFL]

...Mate - you need to ask one of those really smart people like Tyson who thinks the earth is a pear shape!

On a cosmological scale the Earth can be approximated as a sphere. Indeed, if you consider the deepest depths of the Mariana Trench, and the heights of Everest, we are only looking at ~20km of vertical variation on a planet with a radius of 6371km. That's pretty smooth.

However, as well as this relatively low surface roughness there is also the deformation of the planet itself. There's a few effects here. Firstly, there's a fattening at the equator due to the earth's spin. Like a dancers skirt flies out as she spins, so the earth's middle is a little wider than it otherwise would be. This is why the earth can be described as an oblate spheroid - although bear in mind this image is hugely exaggerated. Now, in reality if we measure the minimum radius at poles and the maximum radius at equator we find they each have values of 6,357 km and 6,378 km respectively. So about the same magnitude as the surface roughness.

Secondly, there is the fact that the Earth is geologically heterogeneous. That means that some areas are denser than others, meaning a variable gravitational field, meaning that some areas are held in a little more tightly. This results in a more complex shape we refer to as the 'Geoid' (again hugely exaggerated). This is where the pear reference comes in (it's a bit longer at the North pole, and the South pole has a dimple)

Now, I want to you notice the scale on that last image. We are looking at vertical deviations of up to 80 m from the mean. On the basis of a 6371 km radius, that is a deviation from normal of about 0.001%

 

[MarkFL]

They're still figuring out how gravity manages to hold vast oceans around a globe spinning over 1000mph...

If you apply some simple physics to this issue, you find that the Earth would have to rotate almost 20 times faster than it does in order for the magnitude of the centripetal acceleration at the equator to be equal to that of gravity.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

Regarding reaching the edge - two problems:

1) Anyone who tries to will be stopped by reason of an International treaty set in place in the late 1950's. It's been signed by multiple nations since. Various governments of the world do not want anyone going there.

2) Sure - you can visit what they say is Antarctica on their map - but the Antarctica that is depicted on Flat Earth maps (which, incidentally the UN uses for the main continents...trying finding Antarctica on it!) you can't go to, and according to the accounts of Admiral Richard E. Byrd, it's walled off by huge sheets of ice.

That's convenient.

 

[MarkFL]

You are mistaken. That is the controlled opposition that is the official "Flat earth Society".

Is this the theory that the Flat Earth Society has been put into place by the conspirators to make the entire flat Earth model look kooky?

 

[Stravinsk]

If you apply some simple physics to this issue, you find that the Earth would have to rotate almost 20 times faster than it does in order for the magnitude of the centripetal acceleration at the equator to be equal to that of gravity.

I know every time I go to the equator, I sure feel that increased spin...and density...hmm... :;;D:

Pro tip. Lose weight and reduce dizziness. Travel to the North pole!

 

[Rens]

It has nothing to do with Nasa. Aristotle already said it.
3. Varying Star Constellations
This observation was originally made by Aristotle (384-322 BCE), who declared the Earth was round judging from the different constellations one sees while moving away from the equator.
After returning from a trip to Egypt, Aristotle noted that “there are stars seen in Egypt and…Cyprus which are not seen in the northerly regions.” This phenomenon can only be explained if humans were viewing the stars from a round surface. Aristotle continued and claimed that the sphere of the Earth is “of no great size, for otherwise the effect of so slight a change of place would not be quickly apparent.” (De caelo, 298a2-10)
The farther you go from the equator, the farther the ‘known’ constellations go towards the horizon, and are replaced by different stars. This would not have happened if the world was flat:

4. Shadows and Sticks
If you stick a stick in the (sticky) ground, it will produce a shadow. The shadow moves as time passes (which is the principle for ancient Shadow Clocks). If the world had been flat, then two sticks in different locations would produce the same shadow:
Stick Shadows On A Flat Earth
Moriel Schottlender
Stick Shadows On A Flat Earth
Imagine the Sun's rays (represented by yellow lines) hitting two sticks (white lines) some distance apart. If the Earth were flat, the resulting shadows would be the same length, no matter how far apart you place the sticks.
But they don’t. This is because the earth is round, and not flat:
Stick Shadows On A Round Earth
Moriel Schottlender
Stick Shadows On A Round Earth
Because the Earth is round, sticks placed at distant locations will throw shadows of different lengths.
Eratosthenes (276-194 BCE) used this principle to calculate the circumference of the Earth quite accurately. To see this demonstrated, refer to my experiment video about Eratosthenes and the circumference of the Earth.

http://www.popsci.com/10-ways-you-can-prove-earth-is-round