How about you immediately answer these questions instead.
Why can everyone south of the equator see the exact same stars rotating in the same direction around the same fixed central point in the sky due south of them if they’re supposedly all looking in different directions?
Why are the distances between degrees of latitude uniform and don’t grow exponentially away from the equator?
Why does everyone on Earth get the same result for the Eratosthenes experiment, when people nearer the equator should get a much smaller circumference for the Earth than those nearer the poles?
Come to think of it, was Eratosthenes part of the “round Earth” conspiracy?
Surviving records show that the ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamians based their astronomical forecasts on calculations assuming the Earth is a globe. Did this conspiracy begin at the dawn of civilization, or are all ancient artifacts nothing but Victorian forgeries? If so, why has this never been detected by modern carbon-dating techniques?
Why do arc lengths of given angles of longitude decrease rather than increase south of the equator?
Why does the sun not rise in the northeast and set in the northwest, year round, for everyone on Earth?
Why DOES the sun set, when the law of perspective states that the angular size of the sun’s altitude, like everything else, can’t become negative?
Why does the sun’s angular size not change throughout the day or year, since it is “moving toward and away from us” and is “closer than we’re told”?
Seriously, did you fall asleep during geometry class, or are you just completely demented?
If you believe in zeteticism, why do you keep relying on magical and unprovable solutions, which can’t be shown to exist with your own eyes and clearly don’t exist at all? Apparently, zeteticism is just code for “make any old bullshit up and pretend it’s true.”
If all photographs of a round Earth are a hoax, why not simply create photographs of a flat Earth?
A property of mass is that it has gravitational force regardless of size. If the Earth did not have a gravitational field, wouldn’t that imply that the Earth doesn’t physically exist?
Where is the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station located if the south “pole” is the whole circumference of the Earth?
Wouldn’t creating such elaborate fakes and conspiracies cost an equal–if not greater–amount of money than the science they are supposedly covering up?
The idea of the Earth as a sphere has existed at least since the time of the ancient Greeks, long before NASA. What were their financial motives?
What financial motives could NASA have, since their budget is still cut every year?
How could the sun be a spotlight if it is a sphere? On the flat Earth, the light projection would have to be a semicircle.
Why does the North Star goes to the horizon?
Why do constellations appear to be different in the Southern and Northern hemispheres?
Why is the Coriolis effect stronger near both poles, instead of stronger in the north and weaker in the south?
If the circumferential south pole is preventing the oceans from pouring over the edge of the flat Earth, why didn’t the oceans disappear during the incredible amount of time it would have taken for that ice to form?
If the oceans would–if they could–pour off the edge of the flat Earth, where, then, would they go? Does this mean that whatever keeps the oceans on the surface of the flat Earth only operates in a downward direction on the uppermost surface and is absent on the underneath?
Why are satellites visible from Earth with a pair of binoculars and even the naked eye?
How could a flat body maintain an atmosphere?
Why are other celestial bodies spheres but the Earth is not? How, and why, was the Earth created differently?
That’s… weird. I didn’t think the filter was turned on here. Try again. Put some spaces in between the letters of key words you think might have tripped it.
it does it itself rapidly when someone honestly looks into it.
Many flat earth researchers begin with the same thought. Proving the earth spherical should be easy right?
Diligent and honest/earnest research leads to the conclusion that "what shape is the earth and how can I prove it?" is a much more difficult question to answer than it first appears.
Tallestshil is a bot who just regurgitates copypasta.
If you (or anyone) are at all earnestly interested in the answers to any and all questions regarding this subject, please join us on c/flatearthresearch.
I've already done that, and i'm not going to waste more time on it.
Tallestshil is a troll and his list of "questions" is merely a disearnest rhetorical trick akin to a gish gallop.
The mods here would prefer this be a place for discussion of conspiracies. The shape of the world, and discussions thereof, is not a conspiracy. I created c/flatearthresearch specifically for discussions on this subject.
If you learn to read, you already have 3 answers for why i won't.
My apologies, i wrote the above because it appeared you had just responded to my comment above with "Why can't you post it here" again. This website currently has a bug where comments are being duplicated and coming in twice - apparently sometimes with a considerable delay between them.
If you are earnestly interested in any and/or all of the answers to that copypasta gish gallop - why are you so afraid of not click one link to get them?
How does one explain the sun rising and setting if the Earth is flat? Wouldn't the sun cast its light on the entire surface of the Earth 24/7? Also, what plane is the Earth on compared to the sun? Is the entire flat Earth facing the sun or is the edge of the Earth facing the sun? If the Earth is flat, what is on the bottom side of the Earth? Is the Antartic on the edge of the Earth? Why does the edge of of the Earth not fall off? If the Earth is flat, then why doesn't the edge of the Earth get slung off like a person on a merry-go-round? Or does the Earth not spin?
Oh no, you asked questions! That means you don’t really care about the topic and don’t want to know about it! You’re clearly a shill because you questioned the narrative!
Earth is fixed and stationary: according to the Bible, standing on 4 legs.
Antarctica is the ice ring surrounding the oceans of the earth. The further away from the sun you will get, the colder it will be. Once the temperature gets low enough, water will go from liquid form to a solid form, that being ice. So scientifically, a ice ring has to form around the earth somewhere, as the sun moves in a circle above our heads, in a clockwise direction:
What is beyond the ice ring, known as Antarctica, who knows, you will find yourself in a land of always darkness once you travel deep enough into Antarctica
If you (or anyone) are at all earnestly interested in the answers to any and all questions regarding this subject, please join us on c/flatearthresearch.
Your questions are very common, and most all have trivial answers.
Yes it is 24 hrs sun for a few days or weeks. I have a friend there. This collapses the entire theory. I researched this just like you. Go and search this question in FE specific forums. They build a whole other model with 2 suns or something to explain it.
According to flat earthers….and someone correct me if im wrong….the reason a ship disappears from view is because it just gets to far away to see. You can get a telescope and bring it back into view. Is this correct?
If you watch a ship disappear with your naked eyes, then claim it disappeared due to curvature, this can be disproven with a telescope, that brings the ship back into view. Conclusion that is then drawn, is that the ship disappeared due to optical effects, based on the limitations of our eye sight, and how the horizon rises to eye level.
Well, would this same principle apply at sun set? Because I’m thinking no. It doesn’t matter how powerful a telescope you look through, you ain’t bringing the sun back into view, I don’t think anyway….but you never know.
Interesting enough, if you are around the equator, say Phuket in Thailand, watching the sun set over the sea on a clear day, it is actually possible to bring the sun back into view, and watch as the sun fades away, using a optical zoom device.
DITRH/David Weiss has some videos of the sun fading out on his YouTube channel. This is the 7th. Watch it if you want, to see for yourself; video is only 1 min and 17 seconds long.
Oh i understand. Flat earthers are too retarded to be reasoned with. That or they are feds who won't reason because it is their job to discredit wherever they are by making the place look unhinged and retarded.
Take all the time that you need to understand this
I took all the time I needed a few years ago to calculate how far can be seen at any given height along with the apparent arc and how far below eye level the horizon line sits. Rather than trusting what anyone else said, I dusted off my high school trigonometry to figure out how this all works.
At 6 feet (tall person) or 30,000 feet (looking out airplane window) the horizon line will be curved too slightly to be seen by a human. You can’t look out an airplane window and confirm with the naked eye that the horizon line is a degree or so below eye level. You would need to travel several miles up into the air before the curvature becomes readily perceptible. Most of us will never get to do that, and are left to our calculators.
The Earth is large enough that we won’t see a curve regardless of whether it is flat or round.
but the slope is steep (do you really know it or are you just repeating what NdGT said? From 30,000 feet, you can see about 200 hundred miles, and the drop over that distance is....26,657.7237 feet thats room for a huge mountain of curvature to notice.
So, yes, it is established that you would notice from 30,000 feet, because you could see a drop off of miles.
Using your own numbers:
If we are 30,000 above sea level looking out 200 miles where the horizon line meets the earth, and the drop-off is 26,657 feet, then the horizon line will be about 3 degrees below eye level.
arcsin(56657 / (200 * 5280)) = 3.257 degrees
Nobody looking out a plane window would be able to say whether the horizon line is at eye level or 3 degrees too low. If I recall the drop-off is actually less than this - I'm simply using the numbers you gave me.
no, you heard this and you repeated it. thats all
Funny how I get this same response regardless of whether I'm speaking to a fellow questioner or anybody else.
Punching in your numbers gives me a little over 6 degrees.
asin(240338 / 2244000) = 6.15 degrees
Again, I'm just plugging your 425 mile and 22 dropoff figures. My own calculations were different than that.
would you notice 13 degrees?
Probably. I might able to recognize 6 degrees or the even the lesser angle I calculated myself a few years ago. I do find it surprising how little the horizon line should drop even at such great heights.
This is exactly the point I'm trying to make. A person would have to travel over 20 miles up before they could even begin to perceive the arc of the Earth.
Think about it differently. you are about 5.5 miles high and are looking out across 200 miles, and there is 5 miles of drop in all directions, dropping slightly at first but getting steeper as you look to the horizon. still saying the same thing, and you are saying you would not notice this and i am saying you would.
From an airplane you wouldn't be able to perceive anything other than a straight line at eye level. If we were standing on a more stable structure which is 6 miles high, then perhaps a level could be used to show that the horizon is slightly lower than straight ahead.
look at this
I clicked around the video, and have watched others like it. The apparently flat horizon is what I would expect to see at that height whether the Earth is flat or round. Consider the calculations we just made. The horizon would be a few degrees below level in all directions, and appear flat. You would need to travel much higher before an arc could be seen.
How about you immediately answer these questions instead.
Only casually.
That’s… weird. I didn’t think the filter was turned on here. Try again. Put some spaces in between the letters of key words you think might have tripped it.
Looks like it was the global filter.
Or you could answer them all for people on the fence instead of dodging questions you can’t answer
I don’t have to put it down it does it itself rapidly when someone honestly looks into it.
Many flat earth researchers begin with the same thought. Proving the earth spherical should be easy right?
Diligent and honest/earnest research leads to the conclusion that "what shape is the earth and how can I prove it?" is a much more difficult question to answer than it first appears.
was easy for me to prove it was spherical
Would you care to discuss/share your method(s) over on c/flatearthresearch?
I, and others, are very interested in such things.
I've already done that.
Tallestshil is a bot who just regurgitates copypasta.
If you (or anyone) are at all earnestly interested in the answers to any and all questions regarding this subject, please join us on c/flatearthresearch.
Why can’t you post it here.
3 reasons (that i won't post it here, again)
If you learn to read, you already have 3 answers for why i won't.My apologies, i wrote the above because it appeared you had just responded to my comment above with "Why can't you post it here" again. This website currently has a bug where comments are being duplicated and coming in twice - apparently sometimes with a considerable delay between them.
If you are earnestly interested in any and/or all of the answers to that copypasta gish gallop - why
are you so afraid ofnot click one link to get them?How does one explain the sun rising and setting if the Earth is flat? Wouldn't the sun cast its light on the entire surface of the Earth 24/7? Also, what plane is the Earth on compared to the sun? Is the entire flat Earth facing the sun or is the edge of the Earth facing the sun? If the Earth is flat, what is on the bottom side of the Earth? Is the Antartic on the edge of the Earth? Why does the edge of of the Earth not fall off? If the Earth is flat, then why doesn't the edge of the Earth get slung off like a person on a merry-go-round? Or does the Earth not spin?
Oh no, you asked questions! That means you don’t really care about the topic and don’t want to know about it! You’re clearly a shill because you questioned the narrative!
I can answer two of your questions.
Earth is fixed and stationary: according to the Bible, standing on 4 legs.
Antarctica is the ice ring surrounding the oceans of the earth. The further away from the sun you will get, the colder it will be. Once the temperature gets low enough, water will go from liquid form to a solid form, that being ice. So scientifically, a ice ring has to form around the earth somewhere, as the sun moves in a circle above our heads, in a clockwise direction:
What is beyond the ice ring, known as Antarctica, who knows, you will find yourself in a land of always darkness once you travel deep enough into Antarctica
If you (or anyone) are at all earnestly interested in the answers to any and all questions regarding this subject, please join us on c/flatearthresearch.
Your questions are very common, and most all have trivial answers.
Explain white nights in Russia on a geocentric model
Yes it is 24 hrs sun for a few days or weeks. I have a friend there. This collapses the entire theory. I researched this just like you. Go and search this question in FE specific forums. They build a whole other model with 2 suns or something to explain it.
Max lvl retard post
According to flat earthers….and someone correct me if im wrong….the reason a ship disappears from view is because it just gets to far away to see. You can get a telescope and bring it back into view. Is this correct?
If you watch a ship disappear with your naked eyes, then claim it disappeared due to curvature, this can be disproven with a telescope, that brings the ship back into view. Conclusion that is then drawn, is that the ship disappeared due to optical effects, based on the limitations of our eye sight, and how the horizon rises to eye level.
Well, would this same principle apply at sun set? Because I’m thinking no. It doesn’t matter how powerful a telescope you look through, you ain’t bringing the sun back into view, I don’t think anyway….but you never know.
Interesting enough, if you are around the equator, say Phuket in Thailand, watching the sun set over the sea on a clear day, it is actually possible to bring the sun back into view, and watch as the sun fades away, using a optical zoom device.
How long can you do that for?
I do not know.
DITRH/David Weiss has some videos of the sun fading out on his YouTube channel. This is the 7th. Watch it if you want, to see for yourself; video is only 1 min and 17 seconds long.
https://youtu.be/jccqweCrkzo?si=8mpDbmFfSGuWV4_j
Oh i understand. Flat earthers are too retarded to be reasoned with. That or they are feds who won't reason because it is their job to discredit wherever they are by making the place look unhinged and retarded.
Try harder fed.
OMFG... bots arguing with bots again!? Ever heard of binoculars, retard???
I took all the time I needed a few years ago to calculate how far can be seen at any given height along with the apparent arc and how far below eye level the horizon line sits. Rather than trusting what anyone else said, I dusted off my high school trigonometry to figure out how this all works.
At 6 feet (tall person) or 30,000 feet (looking out airplane window) the horizon line will be curved too slightly to be seen by a human. You can’t look out an airplane window and confirm with the naked eye that the horizon line is a degree or so below eye level. You would need to travel several miles up into the air before the curvature becomes readily perceptible. Most of us will never get to do that, and are left to our calculators.
The Earth is large enough that we won’t see a curve regardless of whether it is flat or round.
Using your own numbers:
If we are 30,000 above sea level looking out 200 miles where the horizon line meets the earth, and the drop-off is 26,657 feet, then the horizon line will be about 3 degrees below eye level.
arcsin(56657 / (200 * 5280)) = 3.257 degrees
Nobody looking out a plane window would be able to say whether the horizon line is at eye level or 3 degrees too low. If I recall the drop-off is actually less than this - I'm simply using the numbers you gave me.
Funny how I get this same response regardless of whether I'm speaking to a fellow questioner or anybody else.
Punching in your numbers gives me a little over 6 degrees.
asin(240338 / 2244000) = 6.15 degrees
Again, I'm just plugging your 425 mile and 22 dropoff figures. My own calculations were different than that.
Probably. I might able to recognize 6 degrees or the even the lesser angle I calculated myself a few years ago. I do find it surprising how little the horizon line should drop even at such great heights.
This is exactly the point I'm trying to make. A person would have to travel over 20 miles up before they could even begin to perceive the arc of the Earth.
From an airplane you wouldn't be able to perceive anything other than a straight line at eye level. If we were standing on a more stable structure which is 6 miles high, then perhaps a level could be used to show that the horizon is slightly lower than straight ahead.
I clicked around the video, and have watched others like it. The apparently flat horizon is what I would expect to see at that height whether the Earth is flat or round. Consider the calculations we just made. The horizon would be a few degrees below level in all directions, and appear flat. You would need to travel much higher before an arc could be seen.