Is the World Flat? The Flatlander's theory..
- Thread starter ODanksta
- Start date
- Status
cat of curiosity
Well-Known Member
what if we were to compromise and just say the earth is a cube? then it would be flat and geometric. everyone wins.
but it would still be bullshit because fuck flat earth.
but it would still be bullshit because fuck flat earth.
Sure Shot
Well-Known Member
cat of curiosity
Well-Known Member
wow, look at that 10,000 foot tall mountain in the background? is it going down hill? like, on a curve?
huh, for such a big piece of earth, i thought it would be taller... or maybe you just can't see all of it because it's below the horizon? o.0
Sure Shot
Well-Known Member
Those 100 foot trees must be bent over too, huh?
cat of curiosity
Well-Known Member
pretty! where's your house from there? i can't see it in the pic...I was just on top of that mountain a couple weeks ago.
Thought someone might appreciate a pic.
View attachment 3739720 View attachment 3739721
cat of curiosity
Well-Known Member
the ones on the mountain? i can't discern a single one, only the ones close to your house. but that's cool, cuz they're, what, 1/10 of a mile away?
Sure Shot
Well-Known Member
Good estimate. Probably closer to 2/10. The ones poking out in the center. I've done alot of tree work and those are an easy 100ft tall.
reddan1981
Well-Known Member
Lol turncoat. So.... as a newly converted back,who does his research, how it is bull to say earth is flat. Can you cite evidence? Pick your number one go to, as a flat-earth refutation. We can all talk about it together.
714steadyeddie
Well-Known Member
Hey man I love a good conspiracy theory but I will give you some info that turn the tides for myself, im not saying this is the end all be all just some information that helped me closed the chapter on flat earth.
The easiest way is to simply look at the shadow the world casts on the moon; it’s curved. A flat disc would show a very different shadow indeed. But aside from that fact, flat earthers also claim the earth doesn’t move. According to them the sun, stars and moon — which are also flat discs — revolve around a flat stationary world, never the other the way around. What they don’t realize is that if that were the case, the sun would always be shining down and visible from every continent at all times, which means the shadow on the moon, which would appear drastically different than it actually looks, would appear the same every night.
Sure Shot
Well-Known Member
In less then one week from now on July 30th, look to the sunrise and there you will see a waxing crescent moonrise out in front of the sun. You'll be on Earth, so what shadow?....
Last edited:
reddan1981
Well-Known Member
1.The easiest way is to simply look at the shadow the world casts on the moon
2.It's curved
3.A flat disc would show a very different shadow indeed
4.According to them (flat earthers) the sun, stars and moon are also flat discs
5.Useing the assumption we live on a flat plane, the sun would always be shining down and visible from every continent at all times
6.The shadow on the moon,would appear the same every night
Last edited:
reddan1981
Well-Known Member
Hello Eddie, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. I would like to make you aware of an inconsistency in the whole “earth casting a shadow on the moon” assumption.
1.I am assuming you are referring to lunar eclipse?, there are records of lunar eclipses happening while both the Sun and Moon are visible in the sky. The Greenwich Royal Observatory recorded that “during the lunar eclipses of July 17th, 1590, November 3rd, 1648, June 16th, 1666, and May 26th, 1668 the moon rose eclipsed whilst the sun was still above the horizon.” McCulluch’sGeography recorded that “on September20th, 1717 and April 20th, 1837 the moonappeared to rise eclipsed before the sun had set.”
The sun and moon have been recorded as being seen in the sky at the same time on
numerous occasions here is a few;
Paris, on the 19th of July, 1750, when the moon appeared visibly eclipsed, while the sun was distinctly to be "seen above the horizon."
On the 20th of April, 1837, the moon appeared to rise eclipsed before the sun had set.
The same phenomenon was observed on the 20th of September, 1717.
In the lunar eclipses of July 17th, 1590; November 3rd, 1648; June 16th, 1666; and May 26th, 1668; the moon rose eclipsed whilst the sun was still apparently above the horizon. Those horizontal eclipses were noticed as early as the time of Pliny.
On the 17th of January, 1870, a similar phenomenon occurred; .and again in July of the same year.
"EXTRAORDINARY PHENOMENA ATTENDING THE ECLIPSE.--On Saturday evening,
February 27th, 1858, at Brussels, the eclipse was seen by several English philosophers who happened to be present. It was attended by a very remarkable appearance, which Dr. Forster said was wholly inexplicable on any laws of natural philosophy with which he was acquainted. The moment before contact a small dusky spot appeared on the moon's surface, and during the whole of the eclipse, a reddish-brown fringe, or penumbra, projected above the shadow of the earth. Another thing still more remarkable was the apparent irregularity of the edge of the shadow. Three persons, one of them an astronomer, were witnesses of these
curious phenomena, which no law of refraction can in any way explain."
"LUNAR ECLIPSE OF FEBRUARY 6TH, 1860.--The only remarkable feature in this
eclipse was the visibility--it might almost be termed the brilliancy of Aristarchus. Kepler, and other spots, were comparatively lost, or at most, barely discernible, as soon as they became enveloped in the shadow; but not so Aristarchus, which evidently shone either
by intrinsic or retained illumination."
The only explanation which has been given of this phenomenon is the refraction caused by the earth's atmosphere. This, at first sight, is a plausible and fairly satisfactory solution, but on carefully examining the subject, it is found to be inadequate and those who have recourse to it cannot be aware that the refraction of an object and that of a shadow are in opposite directions.
An object by refraction is bent upwards; but the shadow of any object is bent
downwards, thus proving that if refraction operated at all, it would do so by elevating the moon above its true position, and throwing the earth's shadow downwards, or directly away from the moon's surface. Hence it is clear that a lunar eclipse by a shadow of the earth is an impossibility.
Also to hold to the premise of Earth casting shadow, one must also hold to the assumption that the moons light comes from reflected sunlight. This also has inconsistency. According to laws of thermodynamics you would expect to find a transferral of heat, however moonlight
has no warming properties, contrary to the theory the opposite is observed. A reflector is a plane or concave surface, which gives off or returns what it receives:--
1.I am assuming you are referring to lunar eclipse?, there are records of lunar eclipses happening while both the Sun and Moon are visible in the sky. The Greenwich Royal Observatory recorded that “during the lunar eclipses of July 17th, 1590, November 3rd, 1648, June 16th, 1666, and May 26th, 1668 the moon rose eclipsed whilst the sun was still above the horizon.” McCulluch’sGeography recorded that “on September20th, 1717 and April 20th, 1837 the moonappeared to rise eclipsed before the sun had set.”
The sun and moon have been recorded as being seen in the sky at the same time on
numerous occasions here is a few;
Paris, on the 19th of July, 1750, when the moon appeared visibly eclipsed, while the sun was distinctly to be "seen above the horizon."
On the 20th of April, 1837, the moon appeared to rise eclipsed before the sun had set.
The same phenomenon was observed on the 20th of September, 1717.
In the lunar eclipses of July 17th, 1590; November 3rd, 1648; June 16th, 1666; and May 26th, 1668; the moon rose eclipsed whilst the sun was still apparently above the horizon. Those horizontal eclipses were noticed as early as the time of Pliny.
On the 17th of January, 1870, a similar phenomenon occurred; .and again in July of the same year.
"EXTRAORDINARY PHENOMENA ATTENDING THE ECLIPSE.--On Saturday evening,
February 27th, 1858, at Brussels, the eclipse was seen by several English philosophers who happened to be present. It was attended by a very remarkable appearance, which Dr. Forster said was wholly inexplicable on any laws of natural philosophy with which he was acquainted. The moment before contact a small dusky spot appeared on the moon's surface, and during the whole of the eclipse, a reddish-brown fringe, or penumbra, projected above the shadow of the earth. Another thing still more remarkable was the apparent irregularity of the edge of the shadow. Three persons, one of them an astronomer, were witnesses of these
curious phenomena, which no law of refraction can in any way explain."
"LUNAR ECLIPSE OF FEBRUARY 6TH, 1860.--The only remarkable feature in this
eclipse was the visibility--it might almost be termed the brilliancy of Aristarchus. Kepler, and other spots, were comparatively lost, or at most, barely discernible, as soon as they became enveloped in the shadow; but not so Aristarchus, which evidently shone either
by intrinsic or retained illumination."
The only explanation which has been given of this phenomenon is the refraction caused by the earth's atmosphere. This, at first sight, is a plausible and fairly satisfactory solution, but on carefully examining the subject, it is found to be inadequate and those who have recourse to it cannot be aware that the refraction of an object and that of a shadow are in opposite directions.
An object by refraction is bent upwards; but the shadow of any object is bent
downwards, thus proving that if refraction operated at all, it would do so by elevating the moon above its true position, and throwing the earth's shadow downwards, or directly away from the moon's surface. Hence it is clear that a lunar eclipse by a shadow of the earth is an impossibility.
Also to hold to the premise of Earth casting shadow, one must also hold to the assumption that the moons light comes from reflected sunlight. This also has inconsistency. According to laws of thermodynamics you would expect to find a transferral of heat, however moonlight
has no warming properties, contrary to the theory the opposite is observed. A reflector is a plane or concave surface, which gives off or returns what it receives:--
Last edited:
reddan1981
Well-Known Member
2./3.Was you aware that there are alternate assertions to the cause of the shadow that occurs on moon (and sun).
We have seen that, during a lunar eclipse, the moon's self-luminous surface is covered by a semi-transparent something; that this "something" is a definite mass, because it has a distinct and circular outline, as seen during its first and last contact with the moon. As a solar eclipse occurs from the moon passing before the sun, so, from the evidence above collected, it is evident that a lunar eclipse arises from a similar cause--a body semi-transparent and well-defined passing before the moon; or between the moon's surface and the observer on the surface of the earth.
That many such bodies exist in the firmament is almost a matter of certainty; and that one such as that which
Sir John Lubbock is of the same opinion, and gives rules and formulæ for calculating their distances and periods.
At the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, in 1850, the president stated that,---
"The opinion was gaining ground, that many of the fixed stars were accompanied by companions emitting no light."
"The 'changeable stars' which disappear for a time, or are eclipsed, have been supposed to have very large opaque bodies revolving about or near to them, so as to obscure them when they come in conjunction with us."
The belief in the existence of non-luminous stars was prevalent in Grecian antiquity, and especially in the early times of Christianity. It was assumed that 'among the fiery stars which are nourished by vapours, there move other earthy bodies, which remain invisible to us!' Origenes."
"Stars that are invisible and consequently have no name move in space together with those that are visible." Diogenes of Appollonica.
Lambert in his cosmological letters admits the existence of "dark cosmical bodies of great size."
We have now seen that the existence of dark bodies revolving about the luminous objects in the firmament has been admitted by practical observers from the earliest ages; and that in our own day such a mass of evidence has accumulated on the subject, that astronomers are compelled to admit that not only dark bodies which occasionally obscure the luminous stars when in conjunction, but that cosmical bodies of large size exist, and that "one at least is attached as a satellite to this earth." It is this dark or "non-luminous satellite," which when in conjunction, or in a line with the moon and an observer on earth, IS THE IMMEDIATE CAUSE OF A LUNAR ECLIPSE.
We have seen that, during a lunar eclipse, the moon's self-luminous surface is covered by a semi-transparent something; that this "something" is a definite mass, because it has a distinct and circular outline, as seen during its first and last contact with the moon. As a solar eclipse occurs from the moon passing before the sun, so, from the evidence above collected, it is evident that a lunar eclipse arises from a similar cause--a body semi-transparent and well-defined passing before the moon; or between the moon's surface and the observer on the surface of the earth.
That many such bodies exist in the firmament is almost a matter of certainty; and that one such as that which
Sir John Lubbock is of the same opinion, and gives rules and formulæ for calculating their distances and periods.
At the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, in 1850, the president stated that,---
"The opinion was gaining ground, that many of the fixed stars were accompanied by companions emitting no light."
"The 'changeable stars' which disappear for a time, or are eclipsed, have been supposed to have very large opaque bodies revolving about or near to them, so as to obscure them when they come in conjunction with us."
The belief in the existence of non-luminous stars was prevalent in Grecian antiquity, and especially in the early times of Christianity. It was assumed that 'among the fiery stars which are nourished by vapours, there move other earthy bodies, which remain invisible to us!' Origenes."
"Stars that are invisible and consequently have no name move in space together with those that are visible." Diogenes of Appollonica.
Lambert in his cosmological letters admits the existence of "dark cosmical bodies of great size."
We have now seen that the existence of dark bodies revolving about the luminous objects in the firmament has been admitted by practical observers from the earliest ages; and that in our own day such a mass of evidence has accumulated on the subject, that astronomers are compelled to admit that not only dark bodies which occasionally obscure the luminous stars when in conjunction, but that cosmical bodies of large size exist, and that "one at least is attached as a satellite to this earth." It is this dark or "non-luminous satellite," which when in conjunction, or in a line with the moon and an observer on earth, IS THE IMMEDIATE CAUSE OF A LUNAR ECLIPSE.
Sure Shot
Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
reddan1981
Well-Known Member
4./5.What is a flat earther? I believe that we live on a flat ocean our continents have differing gradients. I believe in simulated societies and one facet of a simulated society is the manipulation of information. I do not believe the sun/moon, stars or earth are a flat disc. My believes are more in line with Ptolemaic and Zetetic thinking. I believe the sun to be smaller, nearer and the light that it emits is limited. I have not made any conclusions about the moon other than; it does not reflect sunlight and does not rotate as currently stipulated.
6. This is based on assumptions.
6. This is based on assumptions.
- Status