Flat earth debunked.
- Thread starter Gideon300
- 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.
Hello @Glorifindal - welcome to CC... 
Keep asking questions. Demand nothing less than the real actual truth.
Keep asking questions. Demand nothing less than the real actual truth.
Last edited:
-
2
- Show all
Hello @Glorifindal - welcome to CC...
Keep asking questions. Demand nothing less than the real actual truth.
Keep asking questions. Demand nothing less than the real actual truth.
-
1
- Show all
Show me some evidence that is not based on assumptions made about things unproven.
For example, before you can properly declare that we have been bouncing laser beams off of small mirrors placed on the lunar surface, you must be able to properly prove/show how that it is actually true that we went to the moon. If we never actually went to the moon, then what does that do for the claim by NASA et al that we have bounced laser beams off of mirrors we placed on the lunar surface?
I don't think most people realize just how many things today are assumed to be true because they are based on things that are themselves assumed to be true - but, are not - and, have never actually been properly proven to be true.
All of those methods have a flaw - they are based on assumed "facts" that are unreliable for use as real proof of anything.
You cannot use the [assumed] distance to the sun nor its [assumed] size to "prove" the distance to the moon, etc.
Mathematics is a wonderful tool; however, "just because the math works" is not, in of itself, a nail-in-the-coffin proof of something.
A good deal of modern science has been "invented" by mathematics [alone] - describing things that do not actually exist in our physical reality.
Oh, they sound good - only, they simply are not true. They only exist in our imagination.
For example, before you can properly declare that we have been bouncing laser beams off of small mirrors placed on the lunar surface, you must be able to properly prove/show how that it is actually true that we went to the moon. If we never actually went to the moon, then what does that do for the claim by NASA et al that we have bounced laser beams off of mirrors we placed on the lunar surface?
I don't think most people realize just how many things today are assumed to be true because they are based on things that are themselves assumed to be true - but, are not - and, have never actually been properly proven to be true.
All of those methods have a flaw - they are based on assumed "facts" that are unreliable for use as real proof of anything.
You cannot use the [assumed] distance to the sun nor its [assumed] size to "prove" the distance to the moon, etc.
Mathematics is a wonderful tool; however, "just because the math works" is not, in of itself, a nail-in-the-coffin proof of something.
A good deal of modern science has been "invented" by mathematics [alone] - describing things that do not actually exist in our physical reality.
Oh, they sound good - only, they simply are not true. They only exist in our imagination.
-
1
- Show all
Have you ever seen a globe in school? You can't be serious.
O.k., now here you might have a valid point. Now people who believe in a concave-hollow-earth have no problems with heaven being up.
See for yourself.
I'm guessing you are a flat earther (since I'm the only caveman in CC, as far as I know), if you are, would you mind answering my concerns with the flawed belief, which is the pizza shaped earth.
If you do, Page 1, and post 7. Nobody bothered answered them for some reason. lol
O.k., now here you might have a valid point. Now people who believe in a concave-hollow-earth have no problems with heaven being up.
See for yourself.
I'm guessing you are a flat earther (since I'm the only caveman in CC, as far as I know), if you are, would you mind answering my concerns with the flawed belief, which is the pizza shaped earth.
If you do, Page 1, and post 7. Nobody bothered answered them for some reason. lol
I am curious to know why you believe that there is a Hollow Earth model that is more developed/established and proper-and-complete than the Flat Earth model - even to the point of declaring that no Flat Earth model even exists.
The Ball Earth model exists.
The Flat Earth model exists.
The Hollow Earth model exists.
To acknowledge that any one of these exists is not a declaration that you believe it is correct.
You "slam" the FE model every good chance you get - declaring that it does not even exist - and, then you wonder why no FE folks take you seriously....................
Helloooooooooo!
Perhaps, if you were willing to acknowledge the FE model as being just as real as the HE model - you just might get a better response...
"Just sayin'..."
The Ball Earth model exists.
The Flat Earth model exists.
The Hollow Earth model exists.
To acknowledge that any one of these exists is not a declaration that you believe it is correct.
You "slam" the FE model every good chance you get - declaring that it does not even exist - and, then you wonder why no FE folks take you seriously....................
Helloooooooooo!
Perhaps, if you were willing to acknowledge the FE model as being just as real as the HE model - you just might get a better response...
"Just sayin'..."
-
1
- Show all
I am curious to know why you believe that there is a Hollow Earth model that is more developed/established and proper-and-complete than the Flat Earth model - even to the point of declaring that no Flat Earth model even exists.
The Ball Earth model exists.
The Flat Earth model exists.
The Hollow Earth model exists.
To acknowledge that any one of these exists is not a declaration that you believe it is correct.
You "slam" the FE model every good chance you get - declaring that it does not even exist - and, then you wonder why no FE folks take you seriously....................
Helloooooooooo!
Perhaps, if you were willing to acknowledge the FE model as being just as real as the HE model - you just might get a better response...
"Just sayin'..."
The Ball Earth model exists.
The Flat Earth model exists.
The Hollow Earth model exists.
To acknowledge that any one of these exists is not a declaration that you believe it is correct.
You "slam" the FE model every good chance you get - declaring that it does not even exist - and, then you wonder why no FE folks take you seriously....................
Helloooooooooo!
Perhaps, if you were willing to acknowledge the FE model as being just as real as the HE model - you just might get a better response...
"Just sayin'..."
A lot of things are said, but yet, there is no flat earth model. Plus, the model is just one of many points, that discredits pizza earth.
Lastly, if there wasn't so many flat earth threads, there would be no slamming.....hint hint
Why can't you flat earth heads, just have one thread, and try to defend it there?!?! Instead of posting multiple threads, and pretending to answer questions.
Once again, you are a ninja with deflection, but once again, no answers are given. This is the same mentality in multiple flat earth threads. If these points were ever answer in a way that were half way reasonable, instead of ignoring them, it would be pretty hard for me to keep using these points right?!?!
P.S., if you are referring to jstates who posted an analog wrist watch as the flat earth model that the flat earth model exists, than there is no need to explain any more. lol Your mickey mouse proof is beyond silly.
Once you're done dancing around the missing model, you will have to explain away airplane flights, and stars.....And whatever other points in my post.
Final point, I don't really care, if flat earthers actually answer these questions, because I already know the way the are answered by flat earthers, and the answers are so silly, that it makes me think, that's why nobody answers them. Prove me wrong! lol
Que The Eric Dubay spam posts in 3 seconds.....
1.
2.......
(Eric Dubay is the mastermind behind flat earths, for those who don't know.)
I wish flat earthers would return the favor in my concave hollow earth thread, by slamming it with real questions. Jstates tried and I quickly answered those points he made.
I promised I would not say any more. OK, I will, just for you.
The military is compelled to deal with the globe earth. I was in the navy for nearly 9 years. The aerial for the equipment I maintained was on the highest mast of the ship. I had to climb up from time to time to calibrate it. Masts add weight and make the ship less stable. It's like a pendulum, any movement on the surface is magnified at height.
The reason for the height is to overcome the restriction imposed by the earth's curvature. It does not matter how powerful you make the radar, microwave frequencies are line of sight.
Modern anti shipping missiles use the earth's curvature to defeat ship defences. They can be fired much further away than the launch platform can be detected. They fly at perhaps hypersonic speeds, making them difficult to detect. Shortly before they reach the target, they drop down to as little as 1 metre above the sea, if there are no waves. Otherwise they fly at that height above the waves. They come down before they reach horizon. That conceals them from the target defence radars. Once they come over the curvature of the earth, they can be detected. However, the speed and distance from the vessel makes responding very difficult. Ask the crew of Russia's Moskova how hard it is to avoid a missile attack. Ukraine's missile was not all that sophisticated.
If the earth was flat, it would be a no brainer. Missiles could be detected on launch and the launch platform detected and identified before the missile was even close. It's not. I am glad that I'm not in the navy now.
The military is compelled to deal with the globe earth. I was in the navy for nearly 9 years. The aerial for the equipment I maintained was on the highest mast of the ship. I had to climb up from time to time to calibrate it. Masts add weight and make the ship less stable. It's like a pendulum, any movement on the surface is magnified at height.
The reason for the height is to overcome the restriction imposed by the earth's curvature. It does not matter how powerful you make the radar, microwave frequencies are line of sight.
Modern anti shipping missiles use the earth's curvature to defeat ship defences. They can be fired much further away than the launch platform can be detected. They fly at perhaps hypersonic speeds, making them difficult to detect. Shortly before they reach the target, they drop down to as little as 1 metre above the sea, if there are no waves. Otherwise they fly at that height above the waves. They come down before they reach horizon. That conceals them from the target defence radars. Once they come over the curvature of the earth, they can be detected. However, the speed and distance from the vessel makes responding very difficult. Ask the crew of Russia's Moskova how hard it is to avoid a missile attack. Ukraine's missile was not all that sophisticated.
If the earth was flat, it would be a no brainer. Missiles could be detected on launch and the launch platform detected and identified before the missile was even close. It's not. I am glad that I'm not in the navy now.
-
1
- Show all
Australia for one. I was born in England and moved to Australia when I was 15. The seasons are reversed here. Storm cells rotate in the opposite direction. That's because the earth is globe and spinning. I can sort of understand why people question the globe earth. I cannot begin to understand why they refuse to accept the obvious facts when they are presented to them.
Mathematics is about the only field of human endeavour that is exact. The distance to the moon has been calculated. By mathematics. 2 + 2 = 4 and has done since the dawn of time. The measured distance agrees pretty much with the calculated distance. Perhaps in your flat earth world, 2 + 2 = 1. That's the only way you can get a moon to be close to the earth. In your imagination, of course.
"There are six things the Lord hates,
seven that are detestable to him:
haughty eyes,[...]"
"[...]
And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire."
Just a couple passages to meditate upon for those that openly mock their brothers and sisters for their unorthodox beliefs about the shape of the Earth.
seven that are detestable to him:
haughty eyes,[...]"
"[...]
And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire."
Just a couple passages to meditate upon for those that openly mock their brothers and sisters for their unorthodox beliefs about the shape of the Earth.
Further to my last, I guess Paul and James were in danger of the fires of hell. 1 Corinthians 15:36, James 2:20. FE people are those who call born again Christians liars, they also condemn billions of others who reject their foolish notion. I could care less what people believe that does not affect salvation. FE people are those who insist on pushing their ridiculous notion. I don't know why they bother. I do care that others might be caught up in their self deception.
-
1
- Show all