Cali fires are shady AF

[Jiigzz]

Okay, I know you’re very busy and don’t have access to paper, so I’ll give you an easy one. Post a picture of a map that has zero distortion. If you are in fact correct, this should take you just a few seconds.

I also would like this to happen.

Please OP, post an image of the earth on a flat piece of paper that correctly accounts for the size of each country without distortion.

You can see this distortion in a few different models that cartographers use to create maps:

Mercator projections - Preserves the shape of countries but distorts the size
Gall- Peter projection - distorts shape but preserves land area.

How do flat earthers create maps of each country, accounting for time zones, without distorting them in some way on a 2D plane? A globe works perfectly for some reason, but yet even though the earth is flat, we can't replicate this on the same plane. Weird how nature be like that.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I haven’t seen a single shred of evidence that it’s a ball spinning, rotating, and hurling through endless space outside of indoctrinated and perpetuated lies. In fact, many experiments show zero movement able to be detected. Common observable sense, shows that water is always flat, the horizon is always flat and rises to eye level even with insane elevation gain, and even with “thousands” of “satellites” we don’t have a single picture of the earth. We would have countless live streams if this was the case.

Vs a ton of actual amateur scientific experiments show the earth flat.

Your almighty NASA has admitted we can’t leave low earth orbit, we don’t have the technology to go to the moon, and their green screen/cgi work has many observable faults.

It’s clear as day, but your cognitive dissonance makes you a blind and angry little man

Are you seriously suggesting that the earth is flat?

Please, explain to me how a plane can fly from California to China by heading west across the pacific with a flat earth? Besides going under the planet, it would still make it a much longer route than flying east over America and over the Atlantic, which we all know is, in reality, a much longer flight.

Also, go watch a ship appear or disappear over the horizon; it’ll look like its either rising out of or sinking into the water, due to the curvature. A tall boat/ship works best to see this.

Also, not to sound condescending, but have you taken any college-level physics courses? I really don’t see how someone can take even basic post-high-school physics courses and think that a flat earth is compatible with pretty much anything relating to physics.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hLPPE3_DVCw

 

[Jiigzz]

Are you seriously suggesting that the earth is flat?

Please, explain to me how a plane can fly from California to China by heading west across the pacific with a flat earth? Besides going under the planet, it would still make it a much longer route than flying east over America and over the Atlantic, which we all know is, in reality, a much longer flight.

Also, go watch a ship appear or disappear over the horizon; it’ll look like its either rising out of or sinking into the water, due to the curvature. A tall boat/ship works best to see this.

Also, not to sound condescending, but have you taken any college-level physics courses? I really don’t see how someone can take even basic post-high-school physics courses and think that a flat earth is compatible with pretty much anything relating to physics.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hLPPE3_DVCw

They claim that it is something to do with light reflection, and that physics aren't real.

It is hard to debate against because, as Joe Rogan put it, they are dumb.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I also would like this to happen.

Please OP, post an image of the earth on a flat piece of paper that correctly accounts for the size of each country without distortion.

You can see this distortion in a few different models that cartographers use to create maps:

Mercator projections - Preserves the shape of countries but distorts the size
Gall- Peter projection - distorts shape but preserves land area.

How do flat earthers create maps of each country, accounting for time zones, without distorting them in some way on a 2D plane? A globe works perfectly for some reason, but yet even though the earth is flat, we can't replicate this on the same plane. Weird how nature be like that.

We are clearly a flat earth floating in a cosmic sea of round bodies. Sounds legit.

 

[THOR 70]

You have actually seen evidence, it's just that you aren't able to understand how it all works together - you're far too indoctrinated in the notion that the earth is flat to be able to see it.

Let me ask you a few questions:

If the earth is flat, that means one side of the earth will always be in light and the other in darkness. It can be no other way, correct? Once the sun is visible to one side, it will be visible to that side in its entirety. However, that would mean that one side is ALWAYS in light.

With that in mind, can you explain to me how this is possible:

I live in Auckland New Zealand. If I time it right, I can watch the sunrise in three different cities, across 3 different time zones. I can do this by first watching it in Auckland, then by flying to Sydney Australia (3 hr time zone difference) then by flying to Perth, Australia (2 hr time difference from Sydney, 5 hrs total from Auckland).

On the other side of the globe, you can do the same by starting in New York then flying to LA. I could repeat this in Greece by flying back to London.

Now, according to the flat earth logic, this is IMPOSSIBLE to do. At least a few of those locations would share the same side of the globe, and so the sun would rise at the exact same moment.

Can you tell me how I am able to do this? And before you say I can't - I have done this multiple times with early flights with cross country connections. I have also been in flights where I start at 2pm in London, fly for 9hrs, land at 3pm Canadian time yet ONLY saw light, no dark. If i started at 2pm, and flew for 9hrs, by the flat earths logic I should have seen darkness during that flight, but I didn't. How is this possible? The logical explanation is that the flight and sun were always visible to each other due to the direction in which I was travelling as the earth was rotating, but your logic this can't be the case.

Moving again to another flight example:

The flight from Sydney to Perth is approximately 5hrs and 10 minutes. Yet the flight from Perth to Sydney is approximately 4hrs and 5 minutes. If both planes left at the same time and were the exact same aircraft, the flight from perth would land almost 1 hr earlier, not accounting for time zone difference. How is this possible?

I can explain this very simply with a globe that spins, but i'm yet to find a flat earther you can explain this in a manner that actually makes sense.

Can you please enlighten me?

All your questions are based on your globe model understanding. While I don’t know exactly how everything works on the flat earth since it’s so newly discovered, but if you look at proposed models all your questions have potential answers. Let me do my best briefly:


I’m not sure the sun is 93 million miles away like we have been told to believe. Flat earth the sun and moon are local and when moving across the flat plane, the sun gets far enough away that it’s light doesn’t reach the whole(other side)plane. This would also explain your flying(light) question as you’re just outpacing the suns movement or illumination.

Your Sydney to Perth flight time difference is probably due to jet streams. If the earth was rotating at the ungodly speed (1000mph+?) they tell us, it would be extremely fast to fly with the earth passing beneath you and inversely it would be impossible to fly with the rotation. Of course this would be exaggerated at the equator and minimized at the poles. Globe earth believers say all the air is locked in and momentum is why we don’t see, feel, or experience the rotation. This is just silly and means that an airplane couldn’t fly independently of the earth, which we know they can. And good luck landing a plane on a runway moving a thousand MPH.

If you took the time to look into flat earth with open eyes a lot of your questions will
Be answered. But some might not.

 

[Nac]

Also, not to sound condescending, but have you taken any college-level physics courses? I really don’t see how someone can take even basic post-high-school physics courses and think that a flat earth is compatible with pretty much anything relating to physics.

Lol, yup. If you take Flat-earthism to its logical extreme, their concept of an object becomes so alien its like theyre speaking a different language.

 

[THOR 70]

Are you seriously suggesting that the earth is flat?

Please, explain to me how a plane can fly from California to China by heading west across the pacific with a flat earth? Besides going under the planet, it would still make it a much longer route than flying east over America and over the Atlantic, which we all know is, in reality, a much longer flight.

Also, go watch a ship appear or disappear over the horizon; it’ll look like its either rising out of or sinking into the water, due to the curvature. A tall boat/ship works best to see this.

Also, not to sound condescending, but have you taken any college-level physics courses? I really don’t see how someone can take even basic post-high-school physics courses and think that a flat earth is compatible with pretty much anything relating to physics.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hLPPE3_DVCw

These have already been discussed. Everyone has the same amateur questions that are easily disproved 100 times over with amateur experiments. Search and you will find

 

[muscleupcrohn]

They claim that it is something to do with light reflection, and that physics aren't real.

It is hard to debate against because, as Joe Rogan put it, they are dumb.

I don’t claim to be a genius-level physicist by any stretch of the imagination, but I have taken multiple calculus based physics courses, as well as many other physics-related engineering courses, and I can assure you, physics are beyond orders of magnitude more accurate and useful than anything flat earthers have proposed as an alternate theory or explanation. The concept of a flat earth moving upwards through space in place of gravity is asinine. Especially since we KNOW that the moon’s gravitational pull can influence the tides, we know gravity is a thing. Why would the moon exert a gravitational pull on the earth’s water but somehow the earth itself doesn’t? Anyone who knows how to calculate the force of gravity acting between two objects would tell you that since the earth is both larger than the moon, and closer to the waters on the surface of the earth, that there would be a larger gravitational force between the earth and the water than between the moon and the water?

 

[Nac]

And good luck landing a plane on a runway moving a thousand MPH.

Cmon man. You do understand movement and speed are relative?

When Im sitting in a car thats moving 100mph, am I stationary? If I walk towards the rear of a moving train Im in, am I moving in the opposite direction of the train?

 

[justhere4comm]

Einstein had very little to do with the 'bomb' that he's often incorrectly given credit for. His biggest contribution was writing a letter to Eisenhower to convince him that Germany was going to build and use the bomb if the US didn't do it first.

I know who made the bomb, it was Openheimer. What I'm talking about is E=mv2 and splitting the atom which made it possible. They would have figured it out eventually, it was just Einstein who was first. Let's not quibble over who or when. Focus on the forest. Of all I said, you focused on a detail that was easily left out and still retain meaning.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

All your questions are based on your globe model understanding. While I don’t know exactly how everything works on the flat earth since it’s so newly discovered, but if you look at proposed models all your questions have potential answers. Let me do my best briefly:


I’m not sure the sun is 93 million miles away like we have been told to believe. Flat earth the sun and moon are local and when moving across the flat plane, the sun gets far enough away that it’s light doesn’t reach the whole(other side)plane. This would also explain your flying(light) question as you’re just outpacing the suns movement or illumination.

Your Sydney to Perth flight time difference is probably due to jet streams. If the earth was rotating at the ungodly speed (1000mph+?) they tell us, it would be extremely fast to fly with the earth passing beneath you and inversely it would be impossible to fly with the rotation. Of course this would be exaggerated at the equator and minimized at the poles. Globe earth believers say all the air is locked in and momentum is why we don’t see, feel, or experience the rotation. This is just silly and means that an airplane couldn’t fly independently of the earth, which we know they can. And good luck landing a plane on a runway moving a thousand MPH.

If you took the time to look into flat earth with open eyes a lot of your questions will
Be answered. But some might not.

Do you even know the difference between velocity and acceleration? This post indicates that you do not. At all. Learn dynamics and then try to have an actual discussion.

 

[THOR 70]

Are you seriously suggesting that the earth is flat?

Please, explain to me how a plane can fly from California to China by heading west across the pacific with a flat earth? Besides going under the planet, it would still make it a much longer route than flying east over America and over the Atlantic, which we all know is, in reality, a much longer flight.

Also, go watch a ship appear or disappear over the horizon; it’ll look like its either rising out of or sinking into the water, due to the curvature. A tall boat/ship works best to see this.

Also, not to sound condescending, but have you taken any college-level physics courses? I really don’t see how someone can take even basic post-high-school physics courses and think that a flat earth is compatible with pretty much anything relating to physics.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hLPPE3_DVCw

These have already been discussed. Everyone has the same amateur questions that are easily disproved 100 times over with amateur experiments. Search and you will find.

Yes I have a BS degree and the fact that you hold traditional education so highly means you’re very indoctrinated and probably need someone to spoon feed you your thoughts. Really the epitome of this thread. People restating what they have been told to think and not being mature enough to think with an open mind.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

These have already been discussed. Everyone has the same amateur questions that are easily disproved 100 times over with amateur experiments. Search and you will find.

Yes I have a BS degree and the fact that you hold traditional education so highly means you’re very indoctrinated and probably need someone to spoon feed you your thoughts. Really the epitome of this thread. People restating what they have been told to think and not being mature enough to think with an open mind.

BS as in BullS**t or Bachelor of Science? What major?

Also, as I said, your post indicates you do not know the difference between velocity and acceleration. Have you taken Dynamics?

 

[THOR 70]

Are you seriously suggesting that the earth is flat?

Please, explain to me how a plane can fly from California to China by heading west across the pacific with a flat earth? Besides going under the planet, it would still make it a much longer route than flying east over America and over the Atlantic, which we all know is, in reality, a much longer flight.

Also, go watch a ship appear or disappear over the horizon; it’ll look like its either rising out of or sinking into the water, due to the curvature. A tall boat/ship works best to see this.

Also, not to sound condescending, but have you taken any college-level physics courses? I really don’t see how someone can take even basic post-high-school physics courses and think that a flat earth is compatible with pretty much anything relating to physics.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hLPPE3_DVCw

These have already been discussed. Everyone has the same amateur questions that are easily disproved 100 times over with amateur experiments. Search and you will find.

Yes I have a BS degree and the fact that you hold traditional education so highly means you’re very indoctrinated and probably need someone to spoon feed you your thoughts. Really the epitome of this thread. People restating what they have been told to think and not being mature enough to think with an open mind.

 

[THOR 70]

Cmon man. You do understand movement and speed are relative?

When Im sitting in a car thats moving 100mph, am I stationary? If I walk towards the rear of a moving train Im in, am I moving in the opposite direction of the train?

You’re still touching those objects and moving with them. A plane leaves the earth and is independent of its surface.

 

[Nac]

the fact that you hold traditional education so highly means you’re very indoctrinated and probably need someone to spoon feed you your thoughts.

Can you appreciate the hypocrisy here? As someone else pointed out, this "traditional education" in its wider sense is what you yourself take advantage of in your own day to day living.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Yes, I rely on “traditional education.” Would you prefer I build your bridges with amateur science experiment logic and YouTube videos?

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Flat earthers trying to explain away physics and observable phenomena sound like freaking Mr. Satan from Dragon Ball Z. “Umm... smoke and mirrors. It’s clearly a trick!”

 

[Nac]

You’re still touching those objects and moving with them.

Jumping up in the air whilst in the train doesnt change the principal forces in action. Anyway, my point was that movement, and position, are relative and not absolute. So the plane landing on a spinning/moving earth is not some anomaly unexplainable except with a flat earth model. The plane is not some object absolutely independant of any other local objects (earth, specifically).

A plane leaves the earth and is independent of its surface.

...but not independant of its gravitational forces.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Explain how, if there is no gravity, the moon influences the tides? Or are you suggesting that the moon exerts a gravitational pull on the water on earth, but the earth itself does not, despite being closer to the water and larger than the moon is.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Flat earthers claim to have an answer to every question, but what they try so desperately to hide is that, while they can try to explain away one critique, the more answers and explanations they give, the more they begin to contradict themselves. It’s like solving a system of equations; you may be able to say X=1 just by looking at two of the equations, but then when you look at another two you say X=7, and hope no one takes the time to see that 2 =/= 7, or that neither of these solutions work for the fifth equation in the system.

 

[Jiigzz]

All your questions are based on your globe model understanding. While I don’t know exactly how everything works on the flat earth since it’s so newly discovered, but if you look at proposed models all your questions have potential answers. Let me do my best briefly:


I’m not sure the sun is 93 million miles away like we have been told to believe. Flat earth the sun and moon are local and when moving across the flat plane, the sun gets far enough away that it’s light doesn’t reach the whole(other side)plane. This would also explain your flying(light) question as you’re just outpacing the suns movement or illumination.

Your Sydney to Perth flight time difference is probably due to jet streams. If the earth was rotating at the ungodly speed (1000mph+?) they tell us, it would be extremely fast to fly with the earth passing beneath you and inversely it would be impossible to fly with the rotation. Of course this would be exaggerated at the equator and minimized at the poles. Globe earth believers say all the air is locked in and momentum is why we don’t see, feel, or experience the rotation. This is just silly and means that an airplane couldn’t fly independently of the earth, which we know they can. And good luck landing a plane on a runway moving a thousand MPH.

If you took the time to look into flat earth with open eyes a lot of your questions will
Be answered. But some might not.

Even a flat earther can calculate the distance to the sun as it stands now, we aren't being 'told' anything. Surely a flat earther has measured this then. So can you tell me, how far away is the sun, and how the light manages to travel so far, yet somehow just stop abruptly once it reaches earth? If a person from 500 BC (or thereabouts) can measure the distance from the sun to earth, surely a flat earther has managed to do this with modern technology.

Also, while your explanation of jet streams is correct, it cannot be correct in the flat earth model. So you are right, but just reinforcing the globe model by confirming that, lol. Can you explain how a jet stream works in a flat earth model? Remember, you can't use the earths rotation as an explanation (even in part).

Also, LOL at saying you cannot land a plane if the earth is rotating at 1000 MPH. In case you aren't aware, we can do a lot of things when motion is constant. When a plane is flying at 1000km/h, we can walk around the cabin quite freely. If a train is moving at 300km'h on a smooth track, we can also move around freely. The movement isn't the issue, it is the change in that movement. In much the same way a fly can remain airborne in a plane travelling at 1000 km/h despite not touching anything even though the plane is technically moving AROUND him. Does he realise he is flying at 1000 km/h? Should someone warn him of that?

The reason we don't get dizzy is simple: we get dizzy based of our perceived motion against the environment. Been on a merry-go-round? You get pretty dizzy. But then imagine if everything else rotated with you at the same time, all of a sudden that dizziness would dissipate because of your perception against the environment. After all, the merry go round is no longer moving independently of anything, it is simply in motion with everything else.

Also, the earths rotation carries two types of movement: rotation around the sun and rotation on its own axis. If we assume 30 km/s for the former, requiring 365 to complete a full rotation of the sun, the acceleration can be calculated as 1 mm/s^2. For the earths rotation on its own axis, we can calculate a spped of 0.5 m/s and an acceleration of 5 um/s^2.

Using the merry go round example with a diameter of 15m and a velcotity of 30 km/h, the acceleration rate the body experiences is 1.5m /s, a much higher value than both the rate of acceleration around its own axis AND the sun.

 

[THOR 70]

Jumping up in the air whilst in the train doesnt change the principal forces in action. Anyway, my point was that movement, and position, are relative and not absolute. So the plane landing on a spinning/moving earth is not some anomaly unexplainable except with a flat earth model. The plane is not some object absolutely independant of any other local objects (earth, specifically).



...but not independant of its gravitational forces.

So can a plane move independently of the earth or is it locked in place by “gravity?”

 

[Aleksandar37]

I know who made the bomb, it was Openheimer. What I'm talking about is E=mv2 and splitting the atom which made it possible. They would have figured it out eventually, it was just Einstein who was first. Let's not quibble over who or when. Focus on the forest. Of all I said, you focused on a detail that was easily left out and still retain meaning.

I'm going to assume you meant E=mc2, but even without the typo you're incorrect. Oppenheimer is one of the people, yes. You used a definitive statement to make an analogy and your statement was wrong. If you want to keep this all in the sci-fi Holloywood world, then go ahead. If you're going to toss in a few words and call it science, that doesn't actually work. I have no issue with you, but I'm being critical of your words because intentionally or not, that is what feeds into this flat Earth crap.

 

[Nac]

Flat earthers claim to have an answer to every question, but what they try so desperately to hide is that, while they can try to explain away one critique, the more answers and explanations they give, the more they begin to contradict themselves.

The argument looks very ad hoc and convoluted.

I just dont get this being a conspiracy. Why? It makes no sense to me. I mean I get the anti-NASA sentiments, but the science for a spherical earth predates any of that crap anyway. Its like the only evidence for a spherical earth is NASA-related; throw doubt on that and voila no more traditional conception of earth.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Also, if the earth is moving upwards at a constant velocity, which is responsible for “gravity,” then that means every single star, planet, etc. is also moving up at the same rate, which still necessities an essentially infinitely large universe in which every body can travel upwards in.

 

[Aleksandar37]

So can a plane move independently of the earth or is it locked in place by “gravity?”

You've already brought up this example and I've told you that Newton's laws of motions answer your questions.

 

[Jiigzz]

Cmon man. You do understand movement and speed are relative?

When Im sitting in a car thats moving 100mph, am I stationary? If I walk towards the rear of a moving train Im in, am I moving in the opposite direction of the train?

He doesn't understand that concept yet.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Google escape velocity...

 

[Nac]

Also, if the earth is moving upwards at a constant velocity, which is responsible for “gravity,” then that means every single star, planet, etc. is also moving up at the same rate, which still necessities an essentially infinitely large universe in which every body can travel upwards in.

I dont think flat earthers can sensibly claim this.

"Up" is a relative term; what is the earth, the solar system, etc, moving "upwards" relative to?

Furthermore, our concept of "up" in this sense is closely tied to gravity. If you deny gravity, then your concept of "up" (and "down") becomes nonsense.

 

[THOR 70]

It hides the true design of Gods creation, ultimately hiding God from us. It makes people feel insignificant specks floating though endless purposeless earth. Satan wants to disconnect us from our creator and perverse his design and creation. He does the same thing with religion. Many like Catholicism Mormonism, Jesuit, etc have a good Christian like front but at the highest levels are perversions of true Christianity and satanic in nature. This is why the jesuits pushed Copernicus to promote the globe earth into the universities when until that point, a ton of ancient societies and most of the world knew the earth was flat with the heavens above and hell below.

When we in fact are created in HIS image and loved and judge by HIM. Science is ego filled and makes us feel like the god of our world. It comforts people and allows them an out to have to answer to their sins and wrong doings.

I know I’ll lose a lot of people here, but that is the ultimate “Why” behind hiding the true nature of our earth.

 

[Jiigzz]

So can a plane move independently of the earth or is it locked in place by “gravity?”

How does gravity 'lock' anything in place? I throw a rock, it moves forward whilst also gravity is impacting on it, creating a parabola that eventually causes the rock to hit the ground. A plane can move quite freely in the air even though it is impacted by gravity, hence the need for ailerons to control lift and engines to control thrust. Derp.

 

[Nac]

...aaaaaannnd there we go. Shoulda seen this coming. Typical anti-science religious crap.

 

[Aleksandar37]

I know I’ll lose a lot of people here, but that is the ultimate “Why” behind hiding the true nature of our earth.

LMAO because we were right there with you up until this post

 

[Jiigzz]

It hides the true design of Gods creation, ultimately hiding God from us. It makes people feel insignificant specks floating though endless purposeless earth. Satan wants to disconnect us from our creator and perverse his design and creation. He does the same thing with religion. Many like Catholicism Mormonism, Jesuit, etc have a good Christian like front but at the highest levels are perversions of true Christianity and satanic in nature. This is why the jesuits pushed Copernicus to promote the globe earth into the universities when until that point, a ton of ancient societies and most of the world knew the earth was flat with the heavens above and hell below.

When we in fact are created in HIS image and loved and judge by HIM. Science is ego filled and makes us feel like the god of our world. It comforts people and allows them an out to have to answer to their sins and wrong doings.

I know I’ll lose a lot of people here, but that is the ultimate “Why” behind hiding the true nature of our earth.

God is instructing you to be an idiot? No he isn't. In fact, you purposefully ignoring how He created Earth and the Universe is actually reinforcing your disbelief in him. That's a shame.

Here's the funny thing, you are trying to use science to prove the earth is flat. You try disprove physics, yet also use distorted physics to try prove a point. Science isn't something that is tangible. It is a process. You are using it in this very thread, although you don't understand how it works.

 

[Jiigzz]

It hides the true design of Gods creation, ultimately hiding God from us. It makes people feel insignificant specks floating though endless purposeless earth. Satan wants to disconnect us from our creator and perverse his design and creation. He does the same thing with religion. Many like Catholicism Mormonism, Jesuit, etc have a good Christian like front but at the highest levels are perversions of true Christianity and satanic in nature. This is why the jesuits pushed Copernicus to promote the globe earth into the universities when until that point, a ton of ancient societies and most of the world knew the earth was flat with the heavens above and hell below.

When we in fact are created in HIS image and loved and judge by HIM. Science is ego filled and makes us feel like the god of our world. It comforts people and allows them an out to have to answer to their sins and wrong doings.

I know I’ll lose a lot of people here, but that is the ultimate “Why” behind hiding the true nature of our earth.

God is instructing you to be an idiot? No he isn't. In fact, you purposefully ignoring how He created Earth and the Universe is actually reinforcing your disbelief in him. That's a shame.

Here's the funny thing, you are trying to use science to prove the earth is flat. You try disprove physics, yet also use distorted physics to try prove a point. Science isn't something that is tangible. It is a process. You are using it in this very thread, although you don't understand how it works.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Are you insane man? If God is truly omnipotent and omniscient, and it's utterly pointless to worship a God who is not both of these things, then there's absolutely no reason why he couldn't have created the universe using a set of rules, almost a code of sorts, that we are constantly trying to understand and learn, but works whether we are aware of how it works, or even what it is at all. You logic is terrible man, and insulting to people who actually have a relationship with God and know basic physics. It is said that if we define God's work as what cannot be explained by science, then the more we learn, the less God has done and is, which means religious people would push back against science, thinking it diminishes their God. However, if we instead say that God could very easily have created what we call science and physics, then us learning more of it and how it works isn not us saying it's not God, or diminishing God's work, but trying to better understand, respect it, and marvel at it.

 

[Aleksandar37]

It hides the true design of Gods creation, ultimately hiding God from us. It makes people feel insignificant specks floating though endless purposeless earth. Satan wants to disconnect us from our creator and perverse his design and creation.

Quick question: how does using the name of a pagan god for your username fit in with your littler sermon?

 

[THOR 70]

Quick question: how does using the name of a pagan god for your username fit in with your littler sermon?

It doesn’t. Anymore childish questions?

 

[THOR 70]

Quick question: how does using the name of a pagan god for your username fit in with your littler sermon?

It doesn’t. Any more childish questions?

 

[Jiigzz]

Are you insane man? If God is truly omnipotent and omniscient, and it's utterly pointless to worship a God who is not both of these things, then there's absolutely no reason why he couldn't have created the universe using a set of rules, almost a code of sorts, that we are constantly trying to understand and learn, but works whether we are aware of how it works, or even what it is at all. You logic is terrible man, and insulting to people who actually have a relationship with God and know basic physics. It is said that if we define God's work as what cannot be explained by science, then the more we learn, the less God has done and is, which means religious people would push back against science, thinking it diminishes their God. However, if we instead say that God could very easily have created what we call science and physics, then us learning more of it and how it works isn not us saying it's not God, or diminishing God's work, but trying to better understand, respect it, and marvel at it.

In all honesty, it is these people who call themselves Christian who actually do more harm to the religion that help. If you purposely ignore what is fact, then you come across as another indoctrinated Christian who has lost touch with reality. It's like the seven day adventists who not only disbelieve fossil records, but also rock samples and other things which clearly demonstrate the earth is much older than what they claim. Their blind refusal to accept it is a hindrance to them and their religion because no sane person would listen to them.

Science and religion can, and do, co-exist. Indoctrinated Christians who believe otherwise are simply misguided sheep.

 

[franks009]

All your questions are based on your globe model understanding. While I don’t know exactly how everything works on the flat earth since it’s so newly discovered, but if you look at proposed models all your questions have potential answers. Let me do my best briefly:


I’m not sure the sun is 93 million miles away like we have been told to believe. Flat earth the sun and moon are local and when moving across the flat plane, the sun gets far enough away that it’s light doesn’t reach the whole(other side)plane. This would also explain your flying(light) question as you’re just outpacing the suns movement or illumination.

Your Sydney to Perth flight time difference is probably due to jet streams. If the earth was rotating at the ungodly speed (1000mph+?) they tell us, it would be extremely fast to fly with the earth passing beneath you and inversely it would be impossible to fly with the rotation. Of course this would be exaggerated at the equator and minimized at the poles. Globe earth believers say all the air is locked in and momentum is why we don’t see, feel, or experience the rotation. This is just silly and means that an airplane couldn’t fly independently of the earth, which we know they can. And good luck landing a plane on a runway moving a thousand MPH.

If you took the time to look into flat earth with open eyes a lot of your questions will
Be answered. But some might not.

Buddy if ur in a car doing 60 then hit a wall u are still moving at 60 hence why u fly through the windshield. So if a plane is parked on a runway, theoretically it is moving at a thousand mph with the earth. Same reason why if u jump straight up u will land in the same spot. Not 20 feet behind you. Smh wtf is wrong with you

 

[Jiigzz]

Buddy if ur in a car doing 60 then hit a wall u are still moving at 60 hence why u fly through the windshield. So if a plane is parked on a runway, theoretically it is moving at a thousand mph with the earth. Same reason why if u jump straight up u will land in the same spot. Not 20 feet behind you. Smh wtf is wrong with you

And if you jumped up and down on a train travelling 300km/h, you would land in the same spot as well, and not against the back of the train.

The point being that when you are on a moving train, even if you are standing still in the train, you are moving at the same velocity as the train. If someone was to observe you from the outside, to them you would be travelling at 300 km/h as you zipped by, but to someone standing next to you, you would be moving at 0 km/h relative to them.

So if everything is moving on the earth is moving at the same velocity, then all relative movement is 0km/h.

 

[franks009]

The flat Earth argument is over just by getting on a plane, flying east, and eventually ending in the same spot. If it's flat what happens? You just fall off into space? LOL. Gtfo

 

[Nac]

And crikey, more hypocrisy.

Western science and education are judged as a system of indoctrination, yet Western religion is about as dictatorial and authoritarian as you can possibly get. How does one falsify epiphany or revelation? You cant, you either accept at face value on faith, reject it outright, or take an agnostic stance.

Science isnt inherrently "egotistical", lol at any time any hypothesis or theory can in principal be falsified. Thats the beauty and strength of it: it isnt people just making sh1t up.

And if anything, religion is a conspiracy. It has at its core a hierarchy of "enlightened" who collude for the purposes of control and...money.

 

[Nac]

So can a plane move independently of the earth or is it locked in place by “gravity?”

How does gravity 'lock' anything in place?

Yes, he appears to be thinking too absolutely, as if objects are wholly seperate, distinct and autonomous things.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

And crikey, more hypocrisy.

Western science and education are judged as a system of indoctrination, yet Western religion is about as dictatorial and authoritarian as you can possibly get. How does one falsify epiphany or revelation? You cant, you either accept at face value on faith, reject it outright, or take an agnostic stance.

Science isnt inherrently "egotistical", lol at any time any hypothesis or theory can in principal be falsified. Thats the beauty and strength of it: it isnt people just making sh1t up.

And if anything, religion is a conspiracy. It has at its core a hierarchy of "enlightened" who collude for the purposes of control and...money.

Good point. Science can at least be directly tested, and if a theory doesn’t work, it’s discarded or changed. Religion on the other hand relies on the inherent assumption that the given text(s) or leader(s) are divinely inspired and true. For example, the Bible is only valid for people who take it to be, so you can’t say the Bible is true because the Bible says so. That means about as much as a Hindu gelling a Christian that the Bhagavad Gita is divinely inspired; that is, they have no reason to believe it.

 

[Nac]

Good point. Science can at least be directly tested, and if a theory doesn’t work, it’s discarded or changed. Religion on the other hand relies on the inherent assumption that the given text(s) or leader(s) are divinely inspired and true. For example, the Bible is only valid for people who take it to be, so you can’t say the Bible is true because the Bible says so. That means about as much as a Hindu gelling a Christian that the Bhagavad Gita is divinely inspired; that is, they have no reason to believe it.

Sure. Thats why I think Gould's "non-overlapping magisteria" might have some merit to it. Wanna claim divine knowledge? Fine. But you cant then use that to refute any empirical based examination of observable phenomena. They are two nigh-on incompatible "language games" (sprachspiel) based on fundamentally different means of understanding the world (just to be charitable).

 

[justhere4comm]

I'm going to assume you meant E=mc2, but even without the typo you're incorrect. Oppenheimer is one of the people, yes. You used a definitive statement to make an analogy and your statement was wrong. If you want to keep this all in the sci-fi Holloywood world, then go ahead. If you're going to toss in a few words and call it science, that doesn't actually work. I have no issue with you, but I'm being critical of your words because intentionally or not, that is what feeds into this flat Earth crap.

You're right. I meant. E = (1/2)mv^2 (Being cheeky)

I'm pretty sure you're about as correct as I am. I have no problem with you either.
Nothing I stated feeds into the "Flat Earth Crap", only the fact Science Fiction usually is the precursor to reality.

 

[rascal14]

In all honesty, it is these people who call themselves Christian who actually do more harm to the religion that help. If you purposely ignore what is fact, then you come across as another indoctrinated Christian who has lost touch with reality.

You should come to Oklahoma some time, that's 98% of the residents here. Lol