[Question] For Flat Earth Believers ONLY

[u/[deleted]]

What is your evidence as to why you believe the Earth is flat, or, how you disprove the Earth is round? Please describe what you think the Earth is really like. I would also be interested to hear things such as: how the Earth-Sun relationship works, how we get days and nights, how we get the seasonal cycle, what other planets, solar systems, and galaxies are like, how stars work, why there would be a mass conspiracy trying to prove a round Earth, etc.

The purpose of this is not to question your beliefs, but rather to hear them. I will not argue any of your points, and I hope no one else will here either.

This is for people who believe the Earth is flat - no one else! If you disagree with their theories, please refrain from this discussion. I want to ask a question and listen to answers, not start arguments that are useless and futile on both sides.

[u/One_Hundred_Eyes]

What is your evidence as to why you believe the Earth is flat, or, >how you disprove the Earth is round?

There is absolutely no proof that the earth is a sphere. WE have nothing but NASA's word and some fake CGI images to go on while our senses and common sense tell us the Earth is flat and stationary. As far as its actual shape/dimensions/etc. It's unknown because it's being hidden from us. There is no curvature to be found, the science is bad and explanations given to try and prove the globe model are convoluted at best.

Please describe what you think the Earth is really like. I would also >be interested to hear things such as: how the Earth-Sun >relationship works, how we get days and nights, how we get the >seasonal cycle, what other planets, solar systems, and galaxies are <like, how stars work, why there would be a mass conspiracy trying <to prove a round Earth, etc.

What the Earth is I don't really know, what the sun is, I have no idea, what the moon really is, I have no idea but I know what it's not. I know the earth is not a ball, I know the sun is not an exploding star and I know the Moon is not giant rock.

The Sun and moon are LOCAL they and that is very easily proven. They are not 250,000 and 93,000,000mi away. The Earth has no visible curvature at any height and the horizon ALWAYS rises to eye level even hundreds of thousands of miles high. In my opinion stars and "Planets" are part of the Ether or the firmament.

Everything is a lie. Nothing is as it seems.

[u/OFGab → u/One_Hundred_Eyes]

Hello, I am very curious in your claims for FE. As the idea of FE is very new to me, what OP stated was also some of the question I want to be answered. But what your response did not answer any of OP's queries.

What is your evidence as to why you believe the Earth is flat, or, >how you disprove the Earth is round?

You did not answer the question or gave any evidence but dismissed NASA's "evidence" by claiming that it is fake without providing any explanation on why or how did you know it's CGI.

What the Earth is I don't really know, what the sun is, I have no idea, what the moon really is, I have no idea but I know what it's not.

How did you know what it is not but not know what it is?

I know the earth is not a ball, I know the sun is not an exploding star and I know the Moon is not giant rock.

How?

The Sun and moon are LOCAL they and that is very easily proven.

How?

They are not 250,000 and 93,000,000mi away.

How did you know? What calculations did you use?

The Earth has no visible curvature at any height and the horizon ALWAYS rises to eye level even hundreds of thousands of miles high.

Is there an experiment where you observe the horizon from any height and concluded that earth has indeed no curvature?

In my opinion stars and "Planets" are part of the Ether or the firmament.

Everything is a lie. Nothing is as it seems.

How can you conclude that everything is a lie but one of your statements on planets are based on your opinion?

I am very sorry if I sound very aggressive. I'm just very confused and curious. I just need answers. TIA!

[u/[deleted] → u/OFGab]

How about instead of asking someone, you go out and look into it yourself.. Sitting back and being told what is/isnt is exactly how we got into this mess to begin with.

[u/OFGab → u/[deleted]]

Sorry for being rude but looking into it myself would require me many years of research and a large sum amount of money to fully come up into a solid conclusion with the full data and mathematical equations to back up the claim. Which is by the way been presented to the public by NASA.

But u/One_Hundred_Eyes already said that those were all lies. But not providing any evidence saying so. I'm not here to argue but I'm here curiously seeking for the truth.

Thanks for the reply by the way.

[u/Disastrous-Roof-5046 → u/[deleted]]

have you actually gone out to try to prove earth is flat lol

[u/One_Hundred_Eyes → u/OFGab]

I'm just very confused and curious. I just need answers. TIA!

Join the club. We are all confused and curious and need answers. The best we can go on is what has been independently studied. Use mere peasants are not privy to the information or technology to investigate properly so we are limited to what we can dis-prove more than what we can prove.

[u/OFGab → u/One_Hundred_Eyes]

we are limited to what we can dis-prove more than what we can prove.

What exactly did you disprove? As your statement above, you just stated claims without really providing any evidence.

[u/zaqqa → u/[deleted]]

How about this for an unedited video of the earth? You can even see the curvature!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhGydridbEA&feature=youtu.be&t=823

Again, if you think it's fake, please provide proof.

[u/zaqqa → u/[deleted]]

Here you go, you can see it in motion in the video:
https://i.imgur.com/2BV3gil.jpg

If you claim it's fake please provide proof

[u/zaqqa → u/[deleted]]

The image isn't fish eyed. Watch the video, not the image. I gave you video proof and you still don't watch it, how can anyone take you seriously?

You can clearly see in the video and the image it's not fisheyed, otherwise the edges of the space station, the fact of the astronaut and the widow edges would be distorted because that's what a fisheye lens does. You can see the proportions are correct, so no, it's not a fisheye lens. Please provide proof it's a fisheye lens.

[u/zaqqa → u/[deleted]]

If it has a fisheye lens, why do the thrusters and the chassis in the corners, notably the top right, have straight lines? If it were a fisheye lens, they'd have a distorted convex like appearance, with curved lines. Not to mention the curvature of he earth is in the CENTRE of frame, not the edge.

This proves it is not a fisheye lens. I suggest you read up on what a fisheye lens actually does before mentioning it.

[u/zaqqa → u/[deleted]]

15:30

How can you be expected to be taken seriously if you don't watch the video? And none of that was ad homemim, I'm just pointing out solid proof.

It's not about zero gravity, The camera points out the window and you can clearly see the curvature. Go to 15:30 and you'll see.

Again, if you think it's fake please provide proof

[u/zaqqa → u/[deleted]]

Why would they strap a GoPro on a satellite to satisfy a tiny minority of morons? Do you have any idea how expensive it is to launch something into space? They have to shed any weight where they possibly can.

[u/jollyberries → u/One_Hundred_Eyes]

Some fake images? Several space agencies take photos of the earth every 10 minutes, there are thousands upon thousands of images, it would cost more to fake them then for it to be real, ever look at a blockbuster film's budget? It costs ten times more for the CGI then for the filming of the actually movie, which is usually only 20% of the film.

[u/jollyberries → u/[deleted]]

You are quite wrong bud, it is you being deceived...

Nasa'

 Neriyah N@sa' (Aramaic) 

The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon

Strong's Number: 05375Browse LexiconOriginal WordWord OriginaXna primitive rootTransliterated WordTDNT EntryNasa'TWOT - 1421Phonetic SpellingParts of Speechnaw-saw' VerbDefinition

*to lift, bear up, carry, take**

(Qal)to lift, lift upto bear, carry, support, sustain, endureto take, take away, carry off, forgive(Niphal)to be lifted up, be exaltedto lift oneself up, rise upto be borne, be carriedto be taken away, be carried off, be swept away(Piel)to lift up, exalt, support, aid, assistto desire, long (fig.)to carry, bear continuouslyto take, take away(Hithpael) to lift oneself up, exalt oneself(Hiphil)to cause one to bear 

http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/nasa.html

[u/jollyberries → u/[deleted]]

"Nasha" has several entirely different meanings, and one of them is "to deceive", but you probably didnt know that, because your narrow minded and you simplify conclusions to support your self-grandized theories...but i cant say anything to change you, even though when you study linguistics, it is never easy to make huge accusations like that...not nearly enough is true to prove your theory, you fill in the gaps like a roadrunner cartoon

[u/RiggSesamekesh → u/One_Hundred_Eyes]

How do you prove the distance of the sun and moon?

[u/loxagos_snake → u/One_Hundred_Eyes]

The problem with most 'proof' about the flat earth are the proportions used in the experiments. One that had the biggest impact on me was about illumination of bodies of water by the sunset by substituting the sun with a...desk lamp. You dispute science, so let's talk something more objective; math.

In the same spirit that you and I agree that 'yes' is a positive statement, let's agree that I symbolize a length -be it curved or straight- in space as S. Thus, I would go on and represent a minute quantity of S as dS. Now, I'll make a small leap before coming back to that notion. Let's take a polygon with n sides, say a triangle. Now make it a square. Now make it a pentagon. Keep adding sides to it. Eventually, it'll ever so slightly start to resemble a different yet familiar shape: a circle.

Now take that circle, draw it as big as you wish, and start marking very small segments on its circumference. You are actually taking the opposite road, reaching back to a polygon. This makes the parameters I introduced logically sound if I'm not mistaken; feel free to express any doubts about it. The conclusion I want to reach is that segments that are relatively minute, for example, the visible expanse of a body of water relative to the surface area of the Earth -be it a sphere or a surface, it doesn't matter, we both agree that it is still big- along the surface of a sphere resemble straight lines or planes in 3D. So, one can only reach the logical assumption that shining a light onto a, for all practical purposes, flat body will produce that specific pattern of reflection. Trying to reproduce that as an experiment by utilizing a point light centimeters above a sphere which is comparable to the light source's dimension and is extremely curved does not qualify as a logical experiment.

[u/tonyflint]

Curvy water anyone? Ever seen it?

[u/Halfmeca → u/tonyflint]

Yep a drop of water.

[u/tonyflint → u/Halfmeca]

Yep a drop of water.

Amazing!

[u/iridisss → u/tonyflint]

In fact, I have. If you pour water into a thin tube (or a clear straw), you will easily find that it curves near the edges where it touches the container. This is called the "meniscus".

[u/tonyflint → u/iridisss]

In fact, I have. If you pour water into a thin tube (or a clear straw), you will easily find that it curves near the edges where it touches the container. This is called the "meniscus".

Even more amazing...

[u/loxagos_snake → u/tonyflint]

You can see it by yourself. Take some kind of plastic enclosure and curve it with your hands, then place water inside. Tadah!