Debunking the flat Earth model.
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (112)
sorted by:
Debunking is exclusively by and for fools. Earnest and capable students/researchers prefer objective (ideally) study instead!
When you assume something to be false (or true!) and then contrive/compile evidence only to support your belief - this is called confirmation bias. It’s what all debunking is.
There are a few problems with your “debunk” beyond that fundamental one above.
First, there is no flat earth model nor map. You can’t refute something which doesn’t exist. The picture shown is, at best, a conceptual aid - and a speculative one to boot.
Second, looking up in the sky to determine the shape of the ground in the opposite direction is unscientific and stupid. The stars can (and) do what they will. The ground is whatever shape it is despite/irrespective of that.
To any with an interest in this subject (for, against, neutral) please join us on flatearthresearch to discuss, explore, and exchange our views on it!
We should all make predictions based on our hypothesis and test to see if those predictions are correct.
Depending on where you are on the Earth (north, south, or equator), the time-lapse celestial image will consistently reflect your location. These results are recreatable by anyone with a time-lapse app or camera.
Northern celestial pole time-lapse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lV8PVzPZcBk
Southern celestial pole time-lapse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w3n-s9i7WQ
Equator celestial time-lapse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPtVG_pVNHI
What other shape could have the same results? https://imgur.com/a/kfnyqUN
Not if we want to conduct a scientific investigation, no. Hypotheses can only be tested by experiment, and though they do include prediction they are vastly more rigorous and defined than that. Imagining things (what you call prediction) and then setting out to find observations which support them is mythology - not science. Experiment is never mere observation for this reason.
True, but they have nothing to do with the shape of the earth. They have to do with the repeated patterns in the sky. The earth and its shape is down here! Only a fool looks at the sky, the literal opposite direction, to study the shape of the ground....
Any shape. One shape that could satisfy your many further unvalidated assumptions is a concave sphere. But if you recognize and excise your unscientific bias from astronomy - you will realize the earth and sky are separate and one does not depend on the other.
It's called "topology" and, yes, you can make many predictions about it based on how external objects interact.
For example: if the Earth were a flat disc, and you put a light above the disc, anywhere, it would be visible anywhere on the disc.
If the Earth were a globe, and you have a light at some distance, there will be a point closest to the light, and a circle centered on that point will represent the barrier past which the light is no longer visible due to it being blocked by the curvature of the globe.
It's pretty obvious you're talking out of your ass here...
We all agree there is an atmosphere, right? And how light is effected by it? Are you retarded or ignorant?