Earth is a ball

Nope

Erfisflat
"A simple no would suffice. There is nothing practical we can do to prove the earth is a spinning ball. And all a person would have to do to prove that water is flat is measure a body of it."
What measure meant.

"This is what they tell you. The Michelson Morley experiment used an inferometer to determine if the earth was moving relative to the æther, which was by then a proven fact(the æther). This is why Einstein said, when referring to the experiment:"
Many experiments have been done to prove aether does not exist.

"Atmospheric refraction. 

@nope"
Why did you call me?

Edril

@Erfisflat

What force suspends the sun and moon?

What force propels them in a circle around the earth, alters the circumference of their rotation and speeds it up / slows it down during seasonal changes?

Edril

Wait a minute...

NASA, an entity with the intelligence and resources to execute the biggest conspiracy in the history of the planet made a HUGE mistake, business-wise. Odd that such a smart organization would ignore this:

Their goal is to make money, right? But, in 2011, their budget was only 18.4 billion.

But why aim so low with the secrets they know?

The average cost of electricity is 12 cents per kilowatt hour.

The sun produces 3.86x10 to the 26th power watts of electricity at any given moment.

The sun is only Ø32 miles. That's a surface area of only ~40385 square miles.
And it's only 3000 miles away. Meaning a Dyson sphere is completely feasible.

Why has no one monopolized solar energy???

::EDIT::

Just did some  (probably bad) math.
The sun could be mined for 27.792x10 to the 23rd power dollars per hour.

Has anyone informed Trump that he can literally become emperor of the universe thanks to NASA secrets?

Erfisflat

While were at it, do you now understand how this is a ridiculous statement?

" Airy's experiment. Maybe thous who think that is evidence don't know how fast light is." 

@nope?

You are arguing how light can be slowed when travelling through a different medium. The telescope was filled with a light-slowing material. Water. 

Erfisflat

@Edril

The Copernican principle is far more important, and I'm not entirely sure what the sun is. 

Erfisflat

"You are claiming water bends light in the same way the atmosphere does. I would say that is not supported by good evidence as we know water is a lot more dense then the atmosphere. You can prove every thing I just said with a light source and different substances.. "

What is there to prove? All you said was that water is more dense than the air. You don't have to prove this is commonly agreed upon. What is disputed is that you think that for whatever reason, (your model dictates it) water in a gaseous state will bend light in the opposite direction than it does in it's liquid state. You cannot demonstrate this claim. It is unfalsifiable and pseudoscientific. I rest my case.

@nope

Erfisflat

@NathanAllen

If you're still with us and would like to debate, please repost you concerns so I know ur here.

Edril

Erfisflat said:

@Edril

The Copernican principle is far more important, and I'm not entirely sure what the sun is. 

Can you elaborate on this?

You do know, at least, that sun light can be utilized to create usable energy. We know how much energy is created by the sun. Flat earth theory states that this much energy is being created by a MUCH smaller and closer object.

A Dyson sphere is a hypothetical machine that essentially surround the sun with solar panels collecting 100% of its energy.

Obviously impossible, for now, if the sun is as big as round-earth lies will have you believe, but in flat-earth cosmology, the sun is a LOT smaller. It would be feasible to create a Dyson sphere or swarm around it.

Flat earth theory states that people who know this and have the resources to accomplish this, have decided not to.

Erfisflat

I really can't speak for everyone else in the flat earth community. There are many possibilities about the sun. It may be past the firmament, meaning they can't get to it. It may be a projection onto the dome. It could be a large electromagnetic semiconductor for all I know. How would the hypothetical Dyson sphere stay aloft and follow the sun on it's circuit? Letting the world know that the earth is flat and geocentric  seems to be a big no-no. Like they HAVE to hide it. Would you support a company blocking out the sun in favor of cheaper power bill?

@Edril

Erfisflat

"Please ellaborate"

Erfisflat

Of course the principle still assumes the earth is a ball, the message is what lengths they go through to hide geocentricity.

Edit: I don't have high speed data and I don't think that was the actual movie.

SilverishGoldNova

@Erfisflat Did you hear Eric Dubay's channel was deleted?

Edril

@Erfisflat

Ok, lets forget the Dyson sphere. No one here has measured the size, distance and make-up of the sun.

I've heard you say several times that people use arguments from authority, and it's basically the flat earth motto not to trust what other people say, yet every answer to questions is either "i don't know", " i haven't researched that" or "look at this video/website/book from the 1800s".
So arguments from authority are either acceptable or not. It can't be acceptable from authorities that accept a flat earth, but not from authorities that don't.

But that's not how a society can operate. You have to be able to judge which authorities to trust, and only challenge the ones to which you are also an expert and can present evidence that they're wrong.

I assume you had lunch today, and i assume you didn't perform the necessary tests to confirm that it wasn't poisoned. You accepted an argument from authority that the food was not poisoned based on some type of probability.

So continuing this conversation can we appeal to research conducted by others or not?

Erfisflat

"So arguments from authority are either acceptable or not. It can't be acceptable from authorities that accept a flat earth, but not from authorities that don't."

The key difference is verifiability. I may be more inclined to believe something hundreds of thousands of people have witnessed, like the Chicago skyline being visible from across lake Michigan, over the claim that 12 new "earth-like" planets being discovered. We can all go out and measure a large body of water. We can all test for motion. These are main tenants of the model i disagree with for those very reasons. I've found the lack of curvature and motion, I don't have to take anyone's word for the earth being flat and motionless. Concerns about a geocentric model are a secondary concern of mine because they do not directly impact the resolution.

Erfisflat

@Edril

If you're talking about nasa, I could give you several reasons why I don't trust them. Here's one off the top of my head.
http://thecoincidencetheorist.com/space/finding-sex-on-nasas-epic-earth-image-once-you-see-it-you-wont-unsee-it/

Erfisflat

They put that sh!t on every school kids science book and tell us it's a photograph. My ten year old daughter bought her first dictionary at the book fair, guess what "photo" was on the cover.

Nope

Erfisflat Was it one of Nasa photos of earth?

Erfisflat

Keep in mind this is a government institution. From the same people that gave us MKULtra 



Govern=control
Ment=mind

Get it?

Erfisflat

Nope said:

Erfisflat Was it one of Nasa photos of earth?

i don't believe there any photos of the ball earth because it isnt a ball, but yes it was the one from the link above. What's wrong, the school won't let you see it?

Nope

Erfisflat It is a blocked cite.

Erfisflat

Yes, one that has the word sex on it.

Edril

@Erfisflat ;
Ok, the acceptance criteria is verifiability. So we agree that stating "hundreds of thousands of people have witnessed" something is not to be construed with providing evidence, right?

Erfisflat

Edril said:

@Erfisflat ;
Ok, the acceptance criteria is verifiability. So we agree that stating "hundreds of thousands of people have witnessed" something is not to be construed with providing evidence, right?

I disagree. If something is commonly witnessed and would be easily verifiable  (like Chicago from across lake Michigan,) it should be considered more viable than an unverifiable image.

Erfisflat

Most people who have ever been on a commercial flight will tell you that they can “see” the curvature of the earth. I am here to tell you that’s simply not true. In fact, if you take a moment to think about the Heliocentric Model, it becomes quite the ridiculous notion – if you use your common sense. If we were on a ball, no matter the size, the horizon would have to be lower in your view the higher you go.Instead, what we actually see is the horizon always level with our eyes. Think about this fact for a moment. How can the horizon rise to the eye of the observer, if the earth if a globe? It simply cannot. It’s physically impossible. Absolute gibberish.  In fact, if you think about it, and we urge you to do so, this is proof of a flat landscape. The earth should have some visible curvature. It does not. Don’t believe me, go and try to find it for yourself.

SilverishGoldNova

namemcname said:

Hahaha, this  again. Cmon, you two are trolling, admit it.

Looks like Mcname is back with another comment calling us a troll and not addressing anything. He forfeited the debate I had with him by the way and got upset and left our debate on DDO

Erfisflat

@silverishgoldnova ;

Probably best to mute him or ignore anything irrelevant, inflammatory comments will be deleted. @namemcname if you have something useful to add to the conversation, please do so. Please don't troll.

averyapro

The Earth is round how do you people not get that. Do you think that the International Space Station and NASA just take pictures of our flat earth and then they have these crazy photo shop software so that they can just make the earth look flat? NO!!! How do you think NASA gets all of these pictures of the Earth, because they look it up online. Again, NO!!!!! Also, do you think that NASA lies to us so that we believe in something that isn't true. Let alone, I don't think the government is lying to us either, I mean they keep a lot of things secret but how long has NASA been around, or let alone the earth. There is no humanly possible way that all of these representatives of the government could keep this secret cooped up inside forever. 

SilverishGoldNova

@averyapro ;http://debateisland.com/discussion/1283/nasa-admitting-to-faking-images

Erfisflat

"The Earth is round how do you people not get that. Do you think that the International Space Station and NASA just take pictures of our flat earth and then they have these crazy photo shop software so that they can just make the earth look flat?"

Yes. It isn't "crazy" Photoshop software. It's just Photoshop. Here, let Robert simmons explain how he did it.



Are you familiar with Photoshop at all?
@averypro

Erfisflat

"Heat from the sun: What about the heat from the sun? Why is the hole earth not the same temperature? When light from the sun comes to the equator it gets a head on impact straight through the atmosphere. The light that goes to the poles comes at a side ways angle meaning it covers a grater area and has to go through more atmosphere."

Except the earth is supposedly at a 23.4° tilt. So it will not hit the equator directly all year long. Yet all years long, the equator remains the warmest part of earth. 


@nope since you've cowered from this debate and are in formals so that I can't respond, I'll start with the refutations and post them here.

Erfisflat

"Let alone, I don't think the government is lying to us either,

68 instances of governments lying to us.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ever-growing-list-of-admitted-false-flag-attacks/5578473

You were saying?

" I mean they keep a lot of things secret but how long has NASA been around,

About 60 years.

"or let alone the earth. "

A few thousand years. What does this prove? Make your point.

"There is no humanly possible way that all of these representatives of the government could keep this secret cooped up inside forever. "

You're right. I'm helping to end it as we speak.

We know, we know, we know….flat earth is just crazy. It’s normal for you to immediate reject and dismiss this notion. We had the same reaction. Everyone does. After all, we’ve all seen the images of Earth from Space, and we have all been exposed to the Heliocentric Model since we were all kids. We take this “reality” for granted. Anyone who says otherwise has got to be a kook, a loon, a nut job. But answer me this: how do you know it’s a globe? What proof do you have? Have you ever seen the entire globe, personally? We’ve already seen here that the government has a long history of lies and deception.

In fact, we set out to prove that the globe existed.  We’ve spent many, many hours, with increasing disbelief, trying to prove that we live on a ball.  We don’t.

So, what about eclipses, the fact that everyone “knows” someone who has circumnavigated the globe, the seasons, the path of the sun in our skies, or the path of the moon in the night sky?  The fact is that, while there are missing pieces to this puzzle, researchers are quickly coming to terms how the system works. We encourage you to research for yourself. Not just naysay here. If you are satisfied with an image of earth as proof positive you live on a spinning ball, move along. This is for believers in the scientific method.

@averyapro

Erfisflat

Anybody like quotes wars? I'll start.

“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.” ~Nikola Tesla

strategery

Okay Erfisflat, BOP is on you to prove the statement that "one can conclude that the Earth is flat."

Would you be willing to bet me then that the Earth is actually flat? Say maybe for a cool $10,000?

If however you are unwilling to take me up on this bet I understand. One possible explanation for this could be because you don't actually believe in what you are saying, or have very low trust in your own conclusion. 

We can conclude then that *you* -Erfisflat- might not conclude that the Earth is actually flat or I will make $10,000 :P

strategery

@Erfisflat
In others words, prove to us that you believe that the Earth is flat.

someone234

If you go around the world you end where you began!

Fact is a fact!

Nope

someone234 Flat earthers often say you go in a circle some how. They say seen you only really fly around the world the planes go in circles. 

someone234

@Nope So in short they deny that the North Pole or South Pole exist altogether? (which are proven by magnetism even if you don't visit the places) 

they think there's some kind of 'edge' in the snow where it is no longer 3-D?

Nope

someone234 Their are two main flat earth debaters on this site. They both say that the earth looks like this.
So they think the north pole exist but not the south pole. I have been debating with them but have had no success in convincing them of any thing.

SilverishGoldNova

@Nope @someone234 show me some curved standing water

someone234

@Nope Damn that's so true. Can't deny the map of truth!

So do they deny penguins too?

SilverishGoldNova

someone234 said:

@Nope Damn that's so true. Can't deny the map of truth!

So do they deny penguins too?

Uh no. Also, one the FE model, there are no poles. Just antarctica.

SilverishGoldNova

someone234 said:

@Nope So in short they deny that the North Pole or South Pole exist altogether? (which are proven by magnetism even if you don't visit the places) 

they think there's some kind of 'edge' in the snow where it is no longer 3-D?

No there is no edge at the end of antarctica, there is a dome and firmament. 

Nope

someone234 Ask them. SilverishGoldNova and Erfisflat are the two flat earthers.

someone234

@SilverishGoldNova So you deny polar bears then?

someone234

@SilverishGoldNova Do you comprehend 'distance' and how far you need to be from something to perceive curvature?

SilverishGoldNova

someone234 said:

@SilverishGoldNova So you deny polar bears then?

Thats... ****ing no still... No flat Earther denies any sort of animal.

Nope

someone234 Depends on your eyes and the shape of the object. 

SilverishGoldNova

someone234 said:

@SilverishGoldNova Do you comprehend 'distance' and how far you need to be from something to perceive curvature?

Oh yes, I have heard that one. 

Please give an explanation to this image from 121,000 feet (we are told we can see curvature at 35,000 feet) oh and the addition 317K feet image

https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipOBHWKzpDKBew5j94MHx335hYJz5pgjbeTqVVMG3_VknYDtJwjbCA4TGxpmSKp_PQ?key=ZVZEbEZmQVExVndzRjdvQnVzTXA4YW95VnZSTzVn

someone234

@SilverishGoldNova There are animals that only inhabit the north pole (polar bears) and animals that only inhabit the south pole (penguins) I named the 2 most famous ones but beneath the water it's much more blatant the poles hav eto exist as the forms of life didffer so much.

Seals are both poles but the 'greyish' seal is only found in south pole whereas browner seals are north pole.

Elephant seals are literally the south pole descendant of the being the evolved into the normal seal and the walrus. They are the intermediary being who went extinct in the north pole but outlasted them in the south pole.

SilverishGoldNova

@someone234 Ok so your argument is, because some animals are only found in the "south pole", the Earth isn't flat. Do I have that right?