EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum

Flat-Earth Model

< Return to subforum
Bi0Hazard
By Bi0Hazard | Jun 1 2017 12:06 AM
There was a previous thread on this, and I just got a little interested in what these flat earthers were saying.
Apparently, to flat earthers, the earth is actually a flat plane and not a globe, to them, the flat earth model looks like this:


Notice the ice surrounding the oceans, this is Antarctica, which they believe is an ice wall that keeps the water in. According to flat earthers, circumnavigating the globe is possible because they circle around the earth.


The flat-earth model also claims that there is a "firmament", and the sun and moon are inside the firmament (being much closer than what is currently accepted).
?quality=80&strip=all&strip=all

The day and night cycle works like a rotating spotlight under the flat earth model:


As for seasons, the sun and moon change positions:


As you can see, the sun and moon are closer to the center at the summer solstice and farthest at the winter solstice.
https://wiki.tfes.org/images/c/c8/Flat_Earth_Seasons.svg

As for the edge of the earth, this is a disagreement among many flat earthers, but the most common views on this are:
1. The earth extends forever as an infinite plane, as soon as you enter the Antarctica ice, it will extend forever (with the possibility of there being other non-ice worlds). Think of it as the floor of the universe, and we live on one tiny part of it.
2. The earth has an edge and it is real and possible to reach, but we either haven't discovered it yet (and may not be attainable at the moment), or the government and NASA knows and is hiding it from the public.

This is a common picture of the flat earth in space:


However, others believe it is on a kind of infinite floor and not floating in space.
Some believe other worlds may exist:


Also, flat-earthers don't believe in gravity, they may accept some alternative gravity-like theory.

It also surprisingly looks the same as the UN symbol:


What about origins? The big bang surely couldn't be true as presented by scientists today if the earth is flat like this or extends forever.
Many are creationists, who believe God created the earth to be flat and put the sun and moon in the "firmament" (Genesis 1:26-27), however, most other Christians (including other young-earth creationists) disagree with this and dispute any scriptural support for the flat earth. Of course, not all flat-earthers are specifically religious or creationist, and they may have their own explanations.

Now this may sound interesting, but we must ask, is this true? The answer is a clear no, the earth turns out to be a spherical shape and looks like this (from photos :(


Also, the earth turns out to rotate around the sun rather than the sun rotating above the earth.

Despite this, flat-earthers will resort to claiming that there is a conspiracy by NASA and the government to hide the flat-earth and invent the globist heliocentric model. They claim that there is no true picture from space of the earth, and the others are frauds.
Why would they do this? Flat-earthers have their views on this, ranging from hiding how special we are (trying to make us look insignificant and so invent a globist heliocentric model) or to make more money.

There is numerous evidence for a round earth even without pictures from space. For example, if you look out into the ocean, you may see a ship coming out of the water (rising out of the sea), this can only be explained by a spherical earth, the flat-earth model predicts that it would hit the vanishing point before it would ever appear to submerge into water. Also, we can see farther from higher altitudes, even with a sort of flat plateau, this can only be explained by a spherical earth. If you stick a stick in the ground, it will have a shadow in the sunlight. If the earth was flat, two sticks in separate locations would produce the same length shadow. If the earth was spherical, we would expect the opposite (different length shadows in separate locations). It turns out that different length shadows exist, fulfilling the spherical earth model (Eratosthenes did this to calculate earth circumference).
Not only that, but if the flat-earth model was correct, we would expect to see a distant spotlight where the sun may be shining at a distance, just like you see the light of a spotlight in a theater even though it is not shining directly above you. However, we don't see this, rather, the sunlight disappears entirely simultaneously. The flat earth model fails the test on this one, but the spherical earth passes, since we would expect the sunlight to be "under" the visible distance.

Flat-earthers will of course try to explain this away, but the goal here is not to be dogmatic, but accept where the evidence leads.
Here is a pro-flat earth video:




Anyways, what do you think of this?
Povski
By Povski | Jun 1 2017 11:05 PM
Bi0Hazard: This is bewildering. Science has become part of popular culture and everybody distorts it to suit their purpose.

That formula in the video for earth's curvature between two points is sheer nonsense. First of all, inches (distance) times
Povski
By Povski | Jun 1 2017 11:12 PM
Povski: Inches (distance) times distance squared = distance cubed. Now how can this result be a measure of curvature?

Even so, the curvature for a quarter of earth's circumference (in video 24,901 miles) is actually earth's radius (in video 3,900 miles). When i applied the formula, however, i got 4800 miles so it's obviously wrong.
Bi0Hazard
By Bi0Hazard | Jun 2 2017 8:38 PM
Povski: The Earth has a curvature of 8 inches per mile squared (since curvature is measured as a straight line extending from a point).
However, the arguments brought by the flat earthers here are irrelevant to curvature, here's why:


As you can see, the line of sight is independent of the curvature. The higher altitude you are, the farther you can see.
admin
By admin | Jun 2 2017 9:26 PM
Bi0Hazard: That solstice thing only works for one hemisphere. As somebody on the other side of the planet I can confirm this is not true.
I'm the main developer for the site. If you have any problems, ideas, questions or concerns please send me a message.
Let's revive the forums!
Povski
By Povski | Jun 20 2017 8:59 PM
Bi0Hazard: Could you please tell me where did you get that number? I am interested in a source with explanations of curve and such.
Goldtop
By Goldtop | Jul 2 2017 3:37 PM
Bi0Hazard: The day and night cycle of the sun as a rotating spotlight is not possible for a number of reasons:

1. The sun's rays shoot out in all directions while a spotlight is a directed light in a confined space, the sun would shine on all of the earth
2. Line of sight would have the sun being observed by everyone on the planet at all times on a flat surface
3. The sun is moving in a circle, which means it has to accelerate at all times, which means it requires a propulsion system, none has been shown to exist.
4. The size the sun would have to be to produce the amount of light and heat is far too small
5. The chemical composition of the sun has not been described by flat earthers
Dassault Papillon
By Dassault Papillon | Jul 2 2017 9:44 PM
I would just like to add that, aside from Boko Haram, I haven't heard of any Creationists who believe in a flat earth.
Bi0Hazard
By Bi0Hazard | Aug 24 2017 6:37 AM
admin: That solstice thing only works for one hemisphere. As somebody on the other side of the planet I can confirm this is not true.
What do you mean? It is supposed to light both hemispheres but change position for seasons.
Bi0Hazard
By Bi0Hazard | Aug 24 2017 6:39 AM
Povski: http://www.davidsenesac.com/Information/line_of_sight.html

Assuming the radius of the Earth is at about 3965 miles, it would have an average approx. curvature of 7.98 inches per mile squared.
The big thing to remember is that line of sight and the curvature drop are not the same thing.
Bi0Hazard
By Bi0Hazard | Aug 24 2017 7:16 AM
Goldtop: Well, lets run through your claims against flat earthers:
1. The sun's rays shoot out in all directions while a spotlight is a directed light in a confined space, the sun would shine on all of the earth
How did you determine this? When you shine a spotlight in your backyard, usually people can have good grounds for believing that it won't flood the neighbors yard. The sun would concentrate its beams on the surface while being proportionally limited by the thick atmospheric strata at angles to the light. This is similar to the reason why the sun appears much less bright at sunset and sunrise than in midday, its light has to travel through a longer distance of the strata being at a angle through the layer.
2. Line of sight would have the sun being observed by everyone on the planet at all times on a flat surface
Good one, but unfortunately that won't work as an argument because the sun is said to be quite low to the Earth (3,000 miles), and as it furthers away, it appears to converge into the vanishing point due to perspective. The vanishing point would be a single point where all perspective lines converge, therefore meaning a higher object moving above you will have to converge at a steeper angle than a lower object. So, not only will the sun's descent be constant, but it would also be able to get far enough away to not be seen (vanishing point).

3. The sun is moving in a circle, which means it has to accelerate at all times, which means it requires a propulsion system, none has been shown to exist.
Uh, no it wouldn't? I don't quite get what you mean here but the sun would rotate around the Earth in the same rate, once every 23 hours 56 minutes.
4. The size the sun would have to be to produce the amount of light and heat is far too small
I will assume you are saying, "At the size the sun is in the flat earth model, it could not produce the heat and light that we observe for long enough periods of time" The sun does not produce energy by nuclear fusion in the flat earth model, it is commonly explained as a electric converter that converts energy from a different source, a different dimension.
Eric Dollard, a researcher of the Sun, has concluded this and spoke out about it:
https://youtu.be/PM5zrzd4pOU
5. The chemical composition of the sun has not been described by flat earthers
True, but if its a type of electric converter, there is no saying it couldn't contain hydrogen and helium.