To all of you non flat earthers.

[Kolistus]

Curious . . . why is this concept important to you?

Exactly my thoughts. The flat eathers put so much time and energy into this one doctrine, if you can even call it that. It really does not matter at all doctrinally or spiritually speaking what shape the earth is. It would be unfortunate if we were lied to on something like this, and I like the fact that flat earthers clearly have good intentions in mind, they talk about Earth being the main part of creation and not just some small speck of dust in the galaxy.

 

[kinda]

If the earth was flat, sailboat would just get smaller and smaller. Flat earth debunked!

Sailboat proves concave earth, not convex. If we live outside the earth, we will always be climbing uphill, if we live inside the earth we will always be walking downhill.

Boat is sinking, not rising. Case in point we live inside the earth, not outside.


This almost put me off the cliff, because it hurts thinking about it.

Fact or fiction? You make the call!

When people realize how profound this is, they will question everything they were taught in school. I hope that line of reasoning starts with Darwin's Theory.

 

[UnoiAmarah]

“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.”
THOMAS PAINE

Even if the habitable surface of the dry land was flat that wouldn't negate the body of matter called earth from being a sphere.

​

 

[kinda]

“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.”
THOMAS PAINE

Even if the habitable surface of the dry land was flat that wouldn't negate the body of matter called earth from being a sphere.
View attachment 226615
​

I see flat earthers reasoning as fantasty and people need an escape from reality.

There isn't a shred evidence to prove a flat earth. This is like arguing, that the sun is cold.

I'm all for questioning, but this is questioning, without reason.

My recommendation for flat earthers is, give up your silly view on the earth, and watch Disney, if you need to be in Alice in Wonderland.

Why won't someone question the convex (hollow) earth theory?

 

[UnoiAmarah]

Why won't someone question the convex (hollow) earth theory?

Personally I am not familiar with the theory, sounds like there isn't much substance to it...

 

[kinda]

Personally I am not familiar with the theory, sounds like there isn't much substance to it...

How so? Just curious. The floor is yours.

 

[Magenta]

East is clockwise, West is widdershins, South rimwise and North hubward. Remember, Flat Earth is an observation. Ball Earth is a theory. The theory needs proof before we should consider denying what our senses tell us.

Why doesn't God say He created a Ball Earth? Why doesn't the bible mention that God spun the Earth around the sun on Day 4? Why did Joshua ask that God stop the sun, if he really meant stop the Earth? If Joshua got it wrong, why didn't the biblical narrator (inspired by God, who would know) correct him, if God really stopped the Earth from spinning? In Isaiah, why does Isaiah refer to the "circle of the Earth" rather than the "ball of the Earth", if Earth is more a ball than a circle? Why, why, why? Believing in a ball-Earth creates many unanswered questions with the scriptures.

Does anyone correct you if you say the sun rose or set?

Do you likewise endlessly correct others when they speak of such?

Because the language used to describe the apparent movement of the
sun is really talking about the motion of the earth in relation to the sun.

You better get busy, and start correcting everybody's idioms.

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

Exactly my thoughts. The flat eathers put so much time and energy into this one doctrine, if you can even call it that. It really does not matter at all doctrinally or spiritually speaking what shape the earth is. It would be unfortunate if we were lied to on something like this, and I like the fact that flat earthers clearly have good intentions in mind, they talk about Earth being the main part of creation and not just some small speck of dust in the galaxy.

The problem with getting wrapped up, even emotionally in this heart of this doctrine, is that there are still struggling people in the world that remain neglected . . . while we complain to each other about the shape of the earth. The Bible, however, is more concerned about the shape of our hearts.

 

[AnnaMarie]

May I ask you "Christians" if you believe the bible to be the true word of God? Have you ever sat down alone and tried to even read scripture? Well if you answered both questions with a yes then you know the word of god to be true . which means flat earth is the truth. There are so many scriptures referring to flat earth. That CLEARLY states it's facts in the BIBLE. You can open scripture and find all these facts yourselves since you proclaim your a believer. Secondly , is it so far off of a thought to think that we were lied to and led to believe all of the FALSE truths from our ADVERSARY for the soul purpose to DECEIVE gods object of his love "human's". To steal the soul's and torment them in eternal damnation. Hmmm if you truly knew scripture you would wipe that grin off you face and get down on your knees in RIGHTEOUS fear of our Lord. For those of you who really are deceived about believing you can see the curvature of earth in a commercial aircraft please get back on that plane and investigate the fishbowl Windows. Remember what the Lord says , "deception is Grand , let NO man deceive you by any by any means . also were warned to " Be not ignorant of Satan's DEVICES" . & THE LORD says his people perish for lack of knowledge ". ... He's very clear that the knowledge of the world is useless and only the word of god can walk you through this deceptive mine field that Satan currently reigns. Here's what the Lord showed me about flat earth that I could see with my own eyes. The most simple way you can see for yourself . test it all you want it never LIES . water . when we're building and we want something to be level , we use a LEVELER right. The water in the level is always right when laid on something that's Flat or LEVELED. NOW Try going out to the ocean or lake or fill up your bathtub or cup ect. It always lays flat no matter what you use to manipulate it . It will always flatten itself out . think about it before responding in a ignorant remark. Test it out for your self and then compare it to scripture on flat earth. "Its the glory of God to conceal a matter and the honor of King's to search it out"..... GODBLESS all of you and may the lord reveal the amount of TRUTH to you ,equal to as much you seek him for it. amen

Sister, when you're on the water, in a boat, it will be leveled because a vessel levels itself in the water. May I know the scripture you mention that proves your theory?

 

[GaryA]

Perhaps someone has an answer to this conundrum?

Well, the thing is, you are not counting anything else then your view as proof. This reminds me to talk with JW people.
So it makes no realy sense to discuss about this theme. Neither you are able to proof your view. You cant tell me where the astronauts landet on earth for to fake the landing of the moon. You cant tell me where the ISS is, if not in the Orbit. You cant tell me where the end of th earth is. You cant tell me how it is possible to fly around the earth, if the earth is not round.
So stay in you believe System, it seems the flat eath community is growing in the last years. Your arguments dont convince me.

And about your questioning about the moon pull effect to the ocean. I believe that God can create things that they fit together, even if we are not able to understand them.

I am asking for a Ball Earth explanation to my question.

And, I am presently inclined to ignore all of the negative remarks until and unless someone can give me a good sound explanation to my question.

If you are not interested in discussing the thread topic, why are you even in the thread???

 

[kinda]

I am asking for a Ball Earth explanation to my question.

And, I am presently inclined to ignore all of the negative remarks until and unless someone can give me a good sound explanation to my question.

If you are not interested in discussing the thread topic, why are you even in the thread???

I will give it a try. What exact explanation to a ball earth do you want? In what regards?

Can you go in depth in what you want?

 

[GaryA]

I will give it a try. What exact explanation to a ball earth do you want? In what regards?

Can you go in depth in what you want?

Read post #96.

 

[kinda]

Perhaps someone has an answer to this conundrum?


Modern science will tell you that the gravitational "pull" of the moon will affect tides - not waves. There is a difference between the two. Waves are always present while the tides move 'in' and 'out'.

If you assume outright that tides occur because of the gravitational "pull" of the moon ( the conclusion of modern science ) -- and then, you go gather the data that modern science has provided -- and, you look at all of the tide cycle patterns everywhere on Earth compared to the position and path of the moon at every precise moment in the tide cycles ----- what will you discover and determine?

Do the patterns match the position and path of the moon?

If they do not match, what does that tell you?

It tells you that modern science is claiming something false.

If they do match, what does that tell you?

It tells you that modern science has built a theory that matches the observation.

And, if so -- does this automatically mean that the theory is true?

No - it does not.

Yet - this has become the 'core' of modern science -- a collection of theories that are specifically designed to match observation -- while not necessarily having any actual resemblance to the true nature of reality.

( Now - just keep that in mind... )



Does the "pull" of the moon affect the Great Lakes? the Dead Sea? other large bodies of water?

How about smaller bodies of water? How about that favorite lake you like to fish on?

How about the water in that cup you are holding at the picnic out by the lake?


We have all heard that "they say" the "pull" of the moon will [ even ] affect the water in our body / brain.

Really?

( Just think for a moment about the different amounts of water in the bodies of humans, animals, plants -- and other things and places where water is concentrated. How should the gravitational "pull" of the moon affect each of them, according to the amount of water and the particular nature of the manner in which it is 'concentrated'? )


Should 'gravity' have a greater "pull" on a larger amount of water or a smaller amount of water?


Modern science will tell you that the gravitational pull of everything is the same on everything else. ( i.e. - the gravitational pull of a bowling ball on everything else around it will be the same - modified by inverse-of-the-square-of-the-distance, etc. )


Why does the "pull" of the moon [ really ] only [ actually ] affect the oceans?


Why is it that -- while standing on the beach of an ocean watching the tide go 'in' and 'out' -- while also watching the water in a glass on a table on that beach remain perfectly still in the glass --- why is it that a force so enormous - enough to 'overcome' the gravitational "pull" of the Earth directly below the ocean from so great a distance out in space - that can move many Gazillions of gallons of water in the ocean - and "hold it up" ( "ocean tide swell", for lack of a better term ) continually ( Do you really understand just how much force would be required to do this? ) --- why is it that it has no effect on the water in the glass? or, the clouds that are between the moon and the ocean? or, the water droplets that are falling from those clouds?

You mean to tell me that the gravitational "pull" of the moon can "hold up" many Gazillions of gallons of water in an ocean while having no effect whatsoever on a raindrop that is falling from a cloud - that is between the moon and the ocean - down to that ocean surface...??????????

"You are kidding --- right???"


( Think in terms of a Gazillions-of-gallons-of-water 'drop' versus a single rain 'drop'. The supposed effect of the "pull" of the moon is that it is able to "lift up and hold up" - [ the weight of ] that G-drop - several feet - as / in a continual action... But, has no effect whatsoever on a single rain drop??? Are you with me so far? Now - just think about that for a while... )


Why doesn't the "pull" of the moon affect the water content of the atmosphere between it and the Earth?

You mean to tell me that the gravitational "pull" of the moon can "hold up" many Gazillions of gallons of water in an ocean while having no effect whatsoever on water vapor in the atmosphere...??????????

"You are kidding --- right???"


Any water vapor - in the atmosphere or anywhere else - that is not specifically being driven downward by the wind - should be rising upwards continually ( even slowly ) - right?

If we place water vapor in a bell jar - completely isolated - no wind currents at all - with the moon directly overhead -- will the water vapor rise upward until it reaches the 'hard' physical limit of the glass at the top of the bell jar?

Don't give me any crap about air pressure, blah blah blah, etc. ----- if the "pull" of the moon can "break" all of those physical laws out in the open ( where so many more / other physical laws come into play ) with the exceedingly-more-heavy oceans - then - it would absolutely have no problem whatsoever "sucking" the water vapor in the bell jar to the top of the bell jar.

The "fluid dynamics" of the liquid water in the oceans would be a much greater "foe" for the "pull" of the moon to overcome than would be the "fluid dynamics" of the water vapor in the bell jar.


These are the kinds of things you need to think about. Expand your awareness to the "bigger picture" of things.


And -- if you study this "opinion" of modern science carefully enough - utilizing the actual 'physics' that is behind the claim -- I believe that you will discover that the gravitational "pull" of the moon ( or the Earth or anything else ) will be much greater on water vapor than it will be on many Gazillions of gallons of water.

In other words, there would be a much greater 'resistance' to the "pull" of the moon from the localized physical properties of a larger amount of water than of a smaller amount of water.


Why does the "pull" of the moon affect the huge amounts of water so massively while having no effect whatsoever on the smaller amounts of water?


Here is another question to consider:


Does the "pull" of the moon affect anything other than water?


If not, then -- why not?


If it does, then -- what effects would there be from it?


( other liquids... gases... ? )


If the "pull" of the moon has such a great effect on the oceans --- why does it have no effect whatsoever on a butterfly or a soap bubble floating in air?

I think these are fair questions Gary. I mentioned my views on gravity some where else, I'm more inclined to believe what Tesla said.

Universal compression makes more sense to me than gravity.

I can theorize, but this is really outside of my knowledge base.

Could it be possible, since the ocean is a much larger body of water than a lake, that more universal compression would be exerted, since the ocean is a much bigger body, than a lake?

Maybe it's not the moon that causes the tide to move, but rather the moon blocks some of the compression (magnetism, gravity, or whatever you want to call it) from being exerted, so there you have a swing in tides?!?!

Look, I'm just brainstorming here, not saying this is fact. This is for the PHD types with massive laboratories to experiment on to figure out. Plus, does it really matter why the tides move? How does this swing the debate to either side? We all know the tides move. I surfed for many years, seen the tides go up and down. There is no question there are tides.

If this satisfies you for an answer, would like you to come up with an answer on why the sailboat goes out of sight, bottom first, in a flat earth model? Airline flights would be a huge one to over come as well with a flat earth.

We can still discuss this tide discussion, but I will just be giving you some guesses. I just accepted the tides as they are, they haven't made we wonder at all. Some things I just accept and don't bother worrying how they work. It could be possible it has to do with magnetism on how the solar system works. Edmond Halley's experiments with magnets and compasses, made him believe the earth is concave, this could possibly explain the tides also.

How would you explain it? You anything better to put fourth, than just question, what science has already put out?

 

[Dino246]

Perhaps someone has an answer to this conundrum?


Modern science will tell you that the gravitational "pull" of the moon will affect tides - not waves. There is a difference between the two. Waves are always present while the tides move 'in' and 'out'.

If you assume outright that tides occur because of the gravitational "pull" of the moon ( the conclusion of modern science ) -- and then, you go gather the data that modern science has provided -- and, you look at all of the tide cycle patterns everywhere on Earth compared to the position and path of the moon at every precise moment in the tide cycles ----- what will you discover and determine?

Do the patterns match the position and path of the moon?

If they do not match, what does that tell you?

It tells you that modern science is claiming something false.

If they do match, what does that tell you?

It tells you that modern science has built a theory that matches the observation.

And, if so -- does this automatically mean that the theory is true?

No - it does not.

Yet - this has become the 'core' of modern science -- a collection of theories that are specifically designed to match observation -- while not necessarily having any actual resemblance to the true nature of reality.

( Now - just keep that in mind... )



Does the "pull" of the moon affect the Great Lakes? the Dead Sea? other large bodies of water?

How about smaller bodies of water? How about that favorite lake you like to fish on?

How about the water in that cup you are holding at the picnic out by the lake?


We have all heard that "they say" the "pull" of the moon will [ even ] affect the water in our body / brain.

Really?

( Just think for a moment about the different amounts of water in the bodies of humans, animals, plants -- and other things and places where water is concentrated. How should the gravitational "pull" of the moon affect each of them, according to the amount of water and the particular nature of the manner in which it is 'concentrated'? )


Should 'gravity' have a greater "pull" on a larger amount of water or a smaller amount of water?


Modern science will tell you that the gravitational pull of everything is the same on everything else. ( i.e. - the gravitational pull of a bowling ball on everything else around it will be the same - modified by inverse-of-the-square-of-the-distance, etc. )


Why does the "pull" of the moon [ really ] only [ actually ] affect the oceans?


Why is it that -- while standing on the beach of an ocean watching the tide go 'in' and 'out' -- while also watching the water in a glass on a table on that beach remain perfectly still in the glass --- why is it that a force so enormous - enough to 'overcome' the gravitational "pull" of the Earth directly below the ocean from so great a distance out in space - that can move many Gazillions of gallons of water in the ocean - and "hold it up" ( "ocean tide swell", for lack of a better term ) continually ( Do you really understand just how much force would be required to do this? ) --- why is it that it has no effect on the water in the glass? or, the clouds that are between the moon and the ocean? or, the water droplets that are falling from those clouds?

You mean to tell me that the gravitational "pull" of the moon can "hold up" many Gazillions of gallons of water in an ocean while having no effect whatsoever on a raindrop that is falling from a cloud - that is between the moon and the ocean - down to that ocean surface...??????????

"You are kidding --- right???"


( Think in terms of a Gazillions-of-gallons-of-water 'drop' versus a single rain 'drop'. The supposed effect of the "pull" of the moon is that it is able to "lift up and hold up" - [ the weight of ] that G-drop - several feet - as / in a continual action... But, has no effect whatsoever on a single rain drop??? Are you with me so far? Now - just think about that for a while... )


Why doesn't the "pull" of the moon affect the water content of the atmosphere between it and the Earth?

You mean to tell me that the gravitational "pull" of the moon can "hold up" many Gazillions of gallons of water in an ocean while having no effect whatsoever on water vapor in the atmosphere...??????????

"You are kidding --- right???"


Any water vapor - in the atmosphere or anywhere else - that is not specifically being driven downward by the wind - should be rising upwards continually ( even slowly ) - right?

If we place water vapor in a bell jar - completely isolated - no wind currents at all - with the moon directly overhead -- will the water vapor rise upward until it reaches the 'hard' physical limit of the glass at the top of the bell jar?

Don't give me any crap about air pressure, blah blah blah, etc. ----- if the "pull" of the moon can "break" all of those physical laws out in the open ( where so many more / other physical laws come into play ) with the exceedingly-more-heavy oceans - then - it would absolutely have no problem whatsoever "sucking" the water vapor in the bell jar to the top of the bell jar.

The "fluid dynamics" of the liquid water in the oceans would be a much greater "foe" for the "pull" of the moon to overcome than would be the "fluid dynamics" of the water vapor in the bell jar.


These are the kinds of things you need to think about. Expand your awareness to the "bigger picture" of things.


And -- if you study this "opinion" of modern science carefully enough - utilizing the actual 'physics' that is behind the claim -- I believe that you will discover that the gravitational "pull" of the moon ( or the Earth or anything else ) will be much greater on water vapor than it will be on many Gazillions of gallons of water.

In other words, there would be a much greater 'resistance' to the "pull" of the moon from the localized physical properties of a larger amount of water than of a smaller amount of water.


Why does the "pull" of the moon affect the huge amounts of water so massively while having no effect whatsoever on the smaller amounts of water?


Here is another question to consider:


Does the "pull" of the moon affect anything other than water?


If not, then -- why not?


If it does, then -- what effects would there be from it?


( other liquids... gases... ? )


If the "pull" of the moon has such a great effect on the oceans --- why does it have no effect whatsoever on a butterfly or a soap bubble floating in air?

It's relatively easy to provide answers to your questions.

However, I will ask you one question first: How are your questions relevant to this thread topic?

 

[kinda]

I think these are fair questions Gary. I mentioned my views on gravity some where else, I'm more inclined to believe what Tesla said.

Universal compression makes more sense to me than gravity.

I can theorize, but this is really outside of my knowledge base.

Could it be possible, since the ocean is a much larger body of water than a lake, that more universal compression would be exerted, since the ocean is a much bigger body, than a lake?

Maybe it's not the moon that causes the tide to move, but rather the moon blocks some of the compression (magnetism, gravity, or whatever you want to call it) from being exerted, so there you have a swing in tides?!?!

Look, I'm just brainstorming here, not saying this is fact. This is for the PHD types with massive laboratories to experiment on to figure out. Plus, does it really matter why the tides move? How does this swing the debate to either side? We all know the tides move. I surfed for many years, seen the tides go up and down. There is no question there are tides.

If this satisfies you for an answer, would like you to come up with an answer on why the sailboat goes out of sight, bottom first, in a flat earth model? Airline flights would be a huge one to over come as well with a flat earth.

We can still discuss this tide discussion, but I will just be giving you some guesses. I just accepted the tides as they are, they haven't made we wonder at all. Some things I just accept and don't bother worrying how they work. It could be possible it has to do with magnetism on how the solar system works. Edmond Halley's experiments with magnets and compasses, made him believe the earth is concave, this could possibly explain the tides also.

How would you explain it? You anything better to put fourth, than just question, what science has already put out?

I can't believe I wrote this. I should get an honory degree from M.I.T. for creativity in guess work, or at least a honory degree in something. This is pretty incredible, if I don't say so myself. lol




kinda just got himself a job at NOAA. OH YEAH! lol

 

[GaryA]

You anything better to put fourth, than just question, what science has already put out?

Nope - not at this time. I just want to question [some of] what [modern] science has put out...

 

[kinda]

Nope - not at this time. I just want to question [some of] what [modern] science has put out...

Well, I will say, this much.. If it wasn't for you, I wouldn't of had the courage to put out the theory of concave earth. I'm really surprised you weren't laughed out of CC for your undying faith in a flat earth. Since you were still here, I figure it was safe for me.

One of my favorite chatters got banned for saying the earth was stationary, or something. This was many years back, so no one really remembers him, except for me probably. Not gonna mention his name, that dude was a straight up rock star, still miss the man, and his teaching to this day.

 

[GaryA]

It's relatively easy to provide answers to your questions.

However, I will ask you one question first: How are your questions relevant to this thread topic?

My 'conundrum' question (or any such similar question concerning something that modern science claims but does not make good sense) is relevant anywhere Ball Earth people tell me I must "prove" Flat Earth while absolutely and utterly refusing to "prove" Ball Earth.

It is a challange of sorts for people who seem to only want to troll the topic to "put up or shut up" (to borrow a modern phrase).

Not everyone in this thread knows - but, I know that you know - that, some time ago, I decided to "step back" from debating Flat Earth - and, have only been interested in helping those who truly want to better understand the Flat Earth model.

At this point, I have decided to "step back" once again - to a place that refuses to give others a platform upon which they may target me with ridiculous nonsense...

I will henceforth not waste any more time trying to answer ignorant questions from Ball Earth "trolls" who are not truly interested in understanding anything and refuse to do some research on their own - and would rather make accusation rather than have civil discussion.

Instead, I will focus on Ball Earth questions.

And, if no one is able to answer my questions in a way that makes sense --- then, I will summarily determine and declare that the Ball Earth theory is not worth considering - in the same manner that Ball Earthers dismiss Flat Earth - with only criticism but without critical thought.

"Just sayin'..."

 

[GaryA]

Well, I will say, this much.. If it wasn't for you, I wouldn't of had the courage to put out the theory of concave earth

And, you have not seen me criticize or insult you in the slightest for your expression of it - correct?

 

[kinda]

My 'conundrum' question (or any such similar question concerning something that modern science claims but does not make good sense) is relevant anywhere Ball Earth people tell me I must "prove" Flat Earth while absolutely and utterly refusing to "prove" Ball Earth.

It is a challange of sorts for people who seem to only want to troll the topic to "put up or shut up" (to borrow a modern phrase).

Not everyone in this thread knows - but, I know that you know - that, some time ago, I decided to "step back" from debating Flat Earth - and, have only been interested in helping those who truly want to better understand the Flat Earth model.

At this point, I have decided to "step back" once again - to a place that refuses to give others a platform upon which they may target me with ridiculous nonsense...

I will henceforth not waste any more time trying to answer ignorant questions from Ball Earth "trolls" who are not truly interested in understanding anything and refuse to do some research on their own - and would rather make accusation rather than have civil discussion.

Instead, I will focus on Ball Earth questions.

And, if no one is able to answer my questions in a way that makes sense --- then, I will summarily determine and declare that the Ball Earth theory is not worth considering - in the same manner that Ball Earthers dismiss Flat Earth - with only criticism but without critical thought.

"Just sayin'..."

Gary, at this point, you just have circular reasoning, and baseless claims. I have put up many "REAL" concerns and questions, and you have ignored them indefinitely. This is true. Than, you say, you are taking the high ground.

I'm sorry my friend, in this discussion, you have lost us all for not acknowledging them. If you just want to be a flat earth priest, than just say it.

I answered a very difficult question, that not to many people would attempt, to the best of my ability, than you ignore mine. This isn't a discussion, this is teaching, without returning the favor. You obviously will never change your mind.

A better title to the thread is, let me teach you about flat earth. You may fool someone, but most see the flat earth model for what it really is, dumb. This is honest!

I hope you realize, that this claim your making, goes against any common sense, reason, and rational thinking. I posted to great videos that debunked your claim, without question. Until you respond to these, I will consider this discussion over, and let you be ignorant of reality.