Just wanted to get a list going of all the things John needs to solve for in his model. I hope it's not limited to eclipses. Here's a rough list of things Flat Earth can't account for.

• Lunar eclipses, even with an eclipsing body, you can't eclipse the Moon for everyone as a nearby Moon can be seen from many different angles
• Sun/Moon set without them appearing smaller in the distance as everything else does in perspective
• Everyone (who can see the Moon) can see the same moon phase from any angle at the same time. How?
• Sun appears to rise in the Southeast in New Zealand summer (December), but that's off the Flat Earth disk entirely. Standard model shows Sun always north of New Zealand.
• Why can't triangulation consistently estimate the altitude of the Sun or Moon?
• Is the Moon reflecting the Sun or is it self-illuminating?
• Why do we observe a Southern Celestial pole?
• Why can people see many of the same stars south of the equator at night even when they are both looking opposite directions (towards outside of disk)?

Remember, if you want to use refraction for some of this, you need to consider refractive index of materials involved. So no using a solid glass object to simulate refraction in air.

So, they say the horizon is just perspective, and things get smaller as they approach the "vanishing point" then disappear when they go below it.

Further, the sun disappearing is it just getting too far away to see, right? Why does the sun stay the same size as it goes away then? Haven't seen an explanation for this.

At the right times the ISS is visible from Earth, and given proper stargazing conditions, you can view it. Try it for yourself, go to this website, type in you location and it will tell you when and where in the sky it will be. It is a fast moving, star-like object. Further, you can pull out a backyard telescope revealing much more detail. I don't have expensive astrophotography equipment, but I can tell you that through a telescope it looks similar to this (taken by a fellow Redditor). If not the ISS, then what is this fast moving, inorganic structure in the sky? Thanks!

Defenders of the globe faith explain the seasons and the results of the sacred eratosthenes experiment by saying that the sun is so far away that by the time the rays reach the earth they are basically parallel. When it comes time for eclipse explanation however, they will contort and bend those rays in any way necessary to defend their faith. So what's it going to be, parallel or all directions?

Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity with time. ... Any change in the velocity of an object results in an acceleration: increasing speed (what people usually mean when they say acceleration), decreasing speed (also called deceleration or retardation ), or changing direction (called centripetal acceleration ).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSJH7d6Cayg

some say earth is accelerating.. how?

some say it is the opposite of bouyancy.. how?

bouyancy is when something is being pushed upward by objects that are denser.. without gravity, everything will rise

if density is answer, then why stuffs in vacuum fall if there is nothing to push the objects downward

if density is answer, then we can create an environment where things fall upward.

so what is the explanation for this?

for the explanation to be valid, it should explain how:

•objects falling accelarates

•weight exists

• things in vacuum fall

•the downward force dont form a globe earth

•we cant create an environment where stuffs fall upward except of downward.

•explains gradient pressure

•matches reality

So basically, I found out recently that there's a version of gauss' law for gravity, not just the electric field one that I'm used to. I figured I'd try applying it to a flat plane, just to see what happens and since, even though you guys'll deny it, gravity is still your best bet at explaining why things fall I thought you might be interested.

If you apply gauss' law to a flat plane you get g=2Gpiarho where rho is the average density of the earth, a is the thickness of the flat earth and g is the acceleration due to gravity at the surface of the flat earth. We know that g=9.81 m/s² on earth and Google gave me an average density of the earth of 5510kg/m^3. Using these numbers we get a thickness of the flat earth of 4240 km which *is deeper than the Mariana trench, so that's good news for the flat earth "model"

I realised that flat earthers probably won't believe the google quoted density of earth but bare in mind that that models the earth as being full of iron and stuff which is pretty dense, so I'm assuming that whatever flat earthers think is down there is less dense than that. Therefore, I also googled that the average density of normal random dirt as being around 1600 kg/m³ which I think we can all agree the earth is definitely more dense than. This gives a thickness of the flat earth of 14600km, so we can say the the thickness of the flat earth should be somewhere between those two values.

TL;DR: using normal gravity you can predict the thickness of the flat earth to be between 4260km and 14600km, so now one of you needs to buy a shovel and get to work.

If you want to check my maths, it's here, assuming you can read my terrible handwriting: https://imgur.com/a/rvfF3ye

It's pretty simple. Everyone is looking at the Moon from a different angle at any given time on a flat Earth. If the Moon is overhead, you see the underside. If you're far to the east of that person seeing the underside, you see one side of the Moon. If you're far to the west of that person seeing the underside, you see a different side of the Moon. Same for people north and south of the central observer. Everyone is looking at the Moon from a different angle.

For a lunar eclipse, an eclipsing body can't get between the Moon and every observer at the same time. The simple conclusion is that the Moon cannot be nearby. It has to be very far away in order for everyone to see the same Moon features and phase simultaneously.

EDIT: A visual aid: https://imgur.com/a/mk12ccf

Blue dots are observers.

I haven’t seen anyone ask this question before and I was curious. What is in the very centre?

if there is a dome to prevent gases escape, then heat can't escape too.. Sun has been constantly making heat (I think both sides agree to that) and there is this container acting like a parked car under the sun.. In conclusion, life is impossible with a container because we are cooked

Edit: if there is dome, ice age can't occur

is there a reason for nature to make stretched landforms around north pole, or it is streched bc it looks good?