Yes, a lot of history has been falsified. Flat earth is idiotic defiance of well established physics. If the earth was a flat disk, it would crumble back into a sphere under the forces of gravity.
It's an oblate spheroid with irregularities in height, not a perfect sphere. What rate of curvature should be able take into account all differences in height between mountain and canyon? Ok, that's unfair. But seriously, is there a rate of constant curvature that would account for even slight changes like rolling hills?
More flat-earth psy-op foolishness.
Yes, a lot of history has been falsified. Flat earth is idiotic defiance of well established physics. If the earth was a flat disk, it would crumble back into a sphere under the forces of gravity.
Prove gravity
We demonstrate that the surface does not curve at the rate it must, given the dimensions we are given
How do you reconcile that
It's an oblate spheroid with irregularities in height, not a perfect sphere. What rate of curvature should be able take into account all differences in height between mountain and canyon? Ok, that's unfair. But seriously, is there a rate of constant curvature that would account for even slight changes like rolling hills?
You have the power of the interwebz in your hands
Plenty of info on our dot win communities if you actually care to look into it
That's what I thought