For all you Ball-Earthers.
(www.youtube.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (24)
sorted by:
Do you have an accurate map of the Earth?
Can you please share your model of the universe?
1, My guess, is the best we got is the Gleason Map, (Looks like the UN Flag) 2, Water above and below the firmament, (dome) in short, all of "outer space" is fake.
Can you please elaborate more?
Two sentences is hardly an explanation.
Do you have any relevant documentation that you can share? Any proper reseach material?
I think the most accurate map we have is the Gleason Map, it looks like what is pictured on the the UN flag. There are plenty of videos of YT talking about how inaccurate our maps are (note, these views are not from a FE perspective. example. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTYsIePy5zg)
Moving on to the model of the universe. one self contained system, heavens above, earth below, stars and planets are lights in the firmament (dome). pretty much exactly how it is described in the bible. this explains it well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-Jpr3kGQXM
and just for fun, this explains ships over the horizon, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeo_-1h6qUc
Forgot to mention. Sailors sailing around Antarctica were/are(?) found themselves routinely off course or not as far as they thought they would be when sailing around the perimeter. (because it's not an island, its a perimeter, for further proof as to why we don't know that.. it's because Antarctica is closed.. see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyo8eKrinDM)
If youtube videos are the best you have then you don't have much, if anything.
Is that the source for your worldview? Seriously?
Nothing written?
This isn't about competetive models. It's about truth. "Globe earth, heliocentric universe" doesn't have the grounds upon which to go on the offensive polemically, it is in dire need of apologetic defense. Unfortunately for it, there is none.
A globe earth would dictate a measurable and detectable curve. This cannot be supplied. The contrary can be. The recent survey work of JTolan covers this nicely. The California aqueduct when measured as a manmade structure measures over distance as with a curved earth, but when the water contained within is measured over distance the results indicate a flat earth.
Yes, we do have accurate maps of the earth. They're flat. That's slightly tongue in cheek. Researching flat earth has had me autodidactically learning about surveying and how maps are made. All maps are made with reference to the sky, as per the coordinate system of latitude and longitude. If there is an intrinsic misunderstanding in the relationship between the sky and the earth, then that error can be included in all calculations without ever being noticed. When you measure earth with reference to the sky on the presumption of a globe earth, you get a ball earth and an arbitrarilly large sky. When you measure the earth with reference to the earth, it comes back flat. If you measure earth with regard to earth at low angles over great distances the measurements vary with regard to temperature and atmospheric conditions. My conclusion there is that the relationship between the earth and the sky is misunderstood, possibly deliberately, resulting in the mathematical transposition of the roundness of the celestial sphere onto the plane of the earth.
Let's assume I don't believe in a round Earth.
What is the correct model then? Demonstrate it. Why won't you?
To what purpose are you constructing a model? What question do you need answered that you need a model to solve?
How does the universe look like really?
Would you not want to know? Do you have no curiosity?