Is The Earth Flat Or Round?
- Thread starter seed_time_harvest
- 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.
There has also never been a single experiment in history showing an object massive enough to, by virtue of its mass alone, cause another smaller mass to orbit around it. The magic theory of gravity allows for oceans, buildings and people to remain forever stuck to the underside of a spinning ball while simultaneously causing objects like the Moon and satellites to remain locked in perpetual circular orbits around the Earth. If these were both true then people should be able to jump up and start orbiting circles around the Earth, or the Moon should have long ago been sucked into the Earth. Neither of these theories have ever been experimentally verified and their alleged results are mutually exclusive.
-
1
- Show all
Real science says prove it. Prove that NASA got to the moon in the first place, let alone conducted experiments there. Lot's of obvious flaws in the NASA stories, and if they lied once, no reason to believe anything they say. If NASA stories are the best evidence you have of gravity acting in other directions than down, its unconvincing at best. Science is supposed to be repeatable.
-
1
- Show all
Newton also theorized and it is now commonly taught that the Earth’s ocean tides are caused by gravitational lunar attraction. If the Moon is only 2,160 miles in diameter and the Earth 8,000 miles, however, using their own math and “law,” it follows that the Earth is 87 times more massive and therefore the larger object should attract the smaller to it, and not the other way around. If the Earth’s greater gravity is what keeps the Moon in orbit, it is impossible for the Moon’s lesser gravity to supersede the Earth’s gravity, especially at Earth’s sea-level, where its gravitational attraction would even further out-trump the Moon’s. And if the Moon’s gravity truly did supersede the Earth’s causing the tides to be drawn towards it, there should be nothing to stop them from continuing onwards and upwards towards their great attractor.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Furthermore, the velocity and path of the Moon are uniform and should therefore exert a uniform influence on the Earth’s tides, when in actuality the Earth’s tides vary greatly and do not follow the Moon. Earth’s lakes, ponds, marshes and other inland bodies of water also inexplicably remain forever outside the Moon’s gravitational grasp! If “gravity” was truly drawing Earth’s oceans up to it, all lakes, ponds and other bodies of standing water should certainly have tides as well.
It is claimed that the other planets are spheres and so therefore Earth must also be a sphere. Firstly, Earth is a “plane” not a “planet,” so the shape of these “planets” in the sky have no bearing on the shape of the Earth beneath our feet. Secondly, these “planets” have been known for thousands of years around the world as the “wandering stars” since they differ from the other fixed stars in their relative motions only. When looked at with an unprejudiced naked-eye or through a telescope, the fixed and wandering stars appear as luminous discs of light, NOT spherical terra firma. The pictures and videos shown by NASA of spherical terra firma planets are all clearly fake computer-generated images, and NOT photographs.
.
FAQ: How is it that metal ships are able to float? Isn't steel heavier than
water?
REPLY: A solid cubic inch of steel weighs more than a solid cubic inch of
water. However, were we to hollow out the cubic inch of steel, leaving it
only just enough metal to retain its size and shape; then it would be lighter
than the water and bob on the surface like a cork.
When a ship weighs less than an equal volume of water, then the ship will
float because it isn't heavy enough to shove the water out of its way and
allow it to sink, viz: the water being heavier, will always work its way under
the ship and lift it up. How so?
By gravity. Were it not for gravity, ships couldn't float, and in point of fact,
were it not for gravity bubbles wouldn't rise to the surface because the same
volume to weight ratio that lifts ships also lifts bubbles.
FAQ: Why don't bubble go sideways instead of up?
REPLY: The Earth's gravity is a vertical force of nature that pulls everything inward
toward its center of mass. (The same holds for the Moon and for Mars) Were
bubbles of air not lighter than an equal volume of water, they'd settle straight
to the bottom like a stone.
_
FAQ: How is it that metal ships are able to float? Isn't steel heavier than
water?
REPLY: A solid cubic inch of steel weighs more than a solid cubic inch of
water. However, were we to hollow out the cubic inch of steel, leaving it
only just enough metal to retain its size and shape; then it would be lighter
than the water and bob on the surface like a cork.
When a ship weighs less than an equal volume of water, then the ship will
float because it isn't heavy enough to shove the water out of its way and
allow it to sink, viz: the water being heavier, will always work its way under
the ship and lift it up. How so?
By gravity. Were it not for gravity, ships couldn't float, and in point of fact,
were it not for gravity bubbles wouldn't rise to the surface because the same
volume to weight ratio that lifts ships also lifts bubbles.
FAQ: Why don't bubble go sideways instead of up?
REPLY: The Earth's gravity is a vertical force of nature that pulls everything inward
toward its center of mass. (The same holds for the Moon and for Mars) Were
bubbles of air not lighter than an equal volume of water, they'd settle straight
to the bottom like a stone.
_
-
1
- Show all
P
The etymology of the word “planet” actually comes from late Old English planete, from Old French planete (Modern French planète), from Latin planeta, from Greek planetes, from (asteres) planetai “wandering (stars),” from planasthai “to wander,” of unknown origin, possibly from PIE *pele “flat, to spread” or notion of “spread out.” And Plane ( n ) “flat surface,” c. 1600, from Latin planum “flat surface, plane, level, plain,” planus “flat, level, even, plain, clear.” They just added a “t” to our Earth plane and everyone bought it.
-
1
- Show all
When you observe the Sun and Moon you see two equally-sized equidistant circles tracing similar paths at similar speeds around a flat, stationary Earth. The “experts” at NASA, however, claim your common sense every day experience is false on all counts! To begin with, they say the Earth is not flat but a big ball; not stationary but spinning around 19 miles per second; they say the Sun does not revolve around the Earth as it appears, but Earth revolves around the Sun; the Moon, on the other hand, does revolve around the Earth, though not East to West as it appears, rather West to East; and the Sun is actually 400 times larger than the Moon and 400 times farther away! You can clearly see they are the same size and distance, you can see the Earth is flat, you can feel the Earth is stationary, but according to the gospel of modern astronomy, you are wrong and a simpleton worthy of endless ridicule if you dare to trust your own eyes and experience.
Quoting Allen Daves, “If the Government or NASA had said to you that the Earth is stationary, imagine that. And then imagine we are trying to convince people that 'no, no it's not stationary, it's moving forward at 32 times rifle bullet speed and spinning at 1,000 miles per hour.' We would be laughed at! We would have so many people telling us 'you are crazy, the Earth is not moving!' We would be ridiculed for having no scientific backing for this convoluted moving Earth theory. And not only that but then people would say, 'oh then how do you explain a fixed, calm atmosphere and the Sun's observable movement, how do you explain that?' Imagine saying to people, 'no, no, the atmosphere is moving also but is somehow magically velcroed to the moving-Earth. The reason is not simply because the Earth is stationary.' So what we are actually doing is what makes sense. We are saying that the moving-Earth theory is nonsense. The stationary-Earth theory makes sense and we are being ridiculed. You've got to picture it being the other way around to realize just how RIDICULOUS this situation is. This theory from the Government and NASA that the Earth is rotating and orbiting and leaning over and wobbling is absolute nonsense and yet people are clinging to it, tightly, like a teddy bear. They just can't bring themselves to face the possibility that the Earth is stationary though ALL the evidence shows it: we feel no movement, the atmosphere hasn't been blown away, we see the Sun move from East-to-West, everything can be explained by a motionless Earth without bringing in all these assumptions to cover up previous assumptions gone bad.”
.
Some years ago a guy on an internet forum insisted that infinity is
impossible. So I suggested pi and how that it's an endless decimal. He
disagreed and said a super computer somewhere had come to the end of it.
Well; I kind of doubt he was being honest 'cause a discovery like that would
be really big news.
Back in the day, I performed pi calculations with a Frederick Post Versalog
1460 slide rule. Well; if you know slide rules: they are accurate enough but
don't provide the user with a display so their use involves quite of bit of
estimation. Us olde timers were probably the first ones to fully appreciate
the invention of electronic calculators.
I think I paid like $40 for my first calculator back in the 1970s. It was a
Radio Shack and had a fluorescent display in the days prior to liquid crystal.
It required four AA batts. They came out with solar power later on, and then
dual power consisting of solar and an A76 battery. Can you just imagine a
calculator with four AA batts? It was a clunker; but I loved it and still have it
to this day: the slide rule too.
* One of the things about death that I really, really dislike is leaving behind
all the cherished things that we accumulate in this life.
_
Some years ago a guy on an internet forum insisted that infinity is
impossible. So I suggested pi and how that it's an endless decimal. He
disagreed and said a super computer somewhere had come to the end of it.
Well; I kind of doubt he was being honest 'cause a discovery like that would
be really big news.
Back in the day, I performed pi calculations with a Frederick Post Versalog
1460 slide rule. Well; if you know slide rules: they are accurate enough but
don't provide the user with a display so their use involves quite of bit of
estimation. Us olde timers were probably the first ones to fully appreciate
the invention of electronic calculators.
I think I paid like $40 for my first calculator back in the 1970s. It was a
Radio Shack and had a fluorescent display in the days prior to liquid crystal.
It required four AA batts. They came out with solar power later on, and then
dual power consisting of solar and an A76 battery. Can you just imagine a
calculator with four AA batts? It was a clunker; but I loved it and still have it
to this day: the slide rule too.
* One of the things about death that I really, really dislike is leaving behind
all the cherished things that we accumulate in this life.
_
-
1
- Show all
Heliocentrists’ astronomical figures always sound perfectly precise, but they have historically been notorious for regularly and drastically changing them to suit their various models. For instance, in his time Copernicus calculated the Sun’s distance from Earth to be 3,391,200 miles. The next century Johannes Kepler decided it was actually 12,376,800 miles away. Issac Newton once said, “It matters not whether we reckon it 28 or 54 million miles distant for either would do just as well!” How scientific!? Benjamin Martin calculated between 81 and 82 million miles, Thomas Dilworth claimed 93,726,900 miles, John Hind stated positively 95,298,260 miles, Benjamin Gould said more than 96 million miles, and Christian Mayer thought it was more than 104 million! Flat-Earthers throughout the ages, conversely, have used sextants and plane trigonometry to make such calculations and found the Sun and Moon both to be only about 32 miles in diameter and less than a few thousand miles from Earth.
Amateur balloon footage taken above the clouds has provided stunning visual proof that the Sun cannot be millions of miles away. In several shots you can see a clear hot-spot reflecting on the clouds directly below the Sun’s spotlight-like influence. If the Sun were actually millions of miles away such a small, localized hot-spot could not occur.
-
1
- Show all
Another proof the Sun is not millions of miles away is found by tracing the angle of sun-rays back to their source above the clouds. There are thousands of pictures showing how sunlight comes down through cloud-cover at a variance of converging angles. The area of convergence is of course the Sun, and is clearly NOT millions of miles away, but rather relatively close to Earth just above the clouds.
