Difference between revisions of "Frequently Asked Questions"

From Flat Earth Community Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(19 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 17: Line 17:
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-myToggle3">
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-myToggle3">
 
<div class="toccolours mw-collapsible-content">A: The images that are commonly thought to be photographs of a ball shaped earth are admitted to be CGI compilations right on the [https://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/about/people/RSimmon.html nasa.gov website]. NASA Data Visualizer and Designer [[Robert_Simmon|Robert Simmon]] has made multiple public statements about how Photoshop is used for images of the Earth.  Even those images which are not outright admitted to be fabrications contain large numbers of inconsistencies and anomalies that make them suspect. Scientific evidence carries a requirement that it be testable and repeatable.  Images from a realm that hasn't been verified to exist and is a violation of natural law ("outer space") taken by agencies that admit that they fabricate evidence do not meet the criteria of scientific evidence. [[ Images_of_a_ball_Earth | read more ...]]</div>
 
<div class="toccolours mw-collapsible-content">A: The images that are commonly thought to be photographs of a ball shaped earth are admitted to be CGI compilations right on the [https://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/about/people/RSimmon.html nasa.gov website]. NASA Data Visualizer and Designer [[Robert_Simmon|Robert Simmon]] has made multiple public statements about how Photoshop is used for images of the Earth.  Even those images which are not outright admitted to be fabrications contain large numbers of inconsistencies and anomalies that make them suspect. Scientific evidence carries a requirement that it be testable and repeatable.  Images from a realm that hasn't been verified to exist and is a violation of natural law ("outer space") taken by agencies that admit that they fabricate evidence do not meet the criteria of scientific evidence. [[ Images_of_a_ball_Earth | read more ...]]</div>
−
</div>
 
  
  
−
 
+
</div>
−
'''Q: If the Earth is not spherical, why do boats disappear over the horizon?
 
−
'''
 
−
 
 
−
A: [coming soon]
 
  
 
<div class="mw-customtoggle-myToggle4" style="cursor:pointer; color:blue">'''Q: Isn't the Earth just too big to verify the curvature?'''  [+/-] Click here to toggle]</div>
 
<div class="mw-customtoggle-myToggle4" style="cursor:pointer; color:blue">'''Q: Isn't the Earth just too big to verify the curvature?'''  [+/-] Click here to toggle]</div>
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-myToggle4">
 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-myToggle4">
 
<div class="toccolours mw-collapsible-content">A: This spurious claim that the Earth is too big too verify the curve is sometimes claimed by pseudoscientific entertainers like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-f63VAwZpo Neil deGrasse Tyson] when it suits their narrative.  If the actual geometry of the alleged ball shape is analyzed however, an intellectually honest person can mathematically determine that if the Earth were a globe of the dimensions claimed, we would be able to see the effects of curvature with the naked eye, and certainly would be able to see it in an airplane or using high powered optical equipment.  To the contrary, numerous long distance observations clearly demonstrate that the curvature predicted by the mainstream model of roughly [https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature 8 inches per mile squared] is never seen or measured anywhere on Earth.  These myriad counterexamples disprove the WGS-84 globe model. Using the radius of 3959 miles and other dimensions claimed by mainstream pseudoscience, we can easily determine that the claimed size of the Earth is NOT too big to verify curvature, if said curvature actually existed in objective reality.  [[Observations  | read more...]] </div>
 
<div class="toccolours mw-collapsible-content">A: This spurious claim that the Earth is too big too verify the curve is sometimes claimed by pseudoscientific entertainers like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-f63VAwZpo Neil deGrasse Tyson] when it suits their narrative.  If the actual geometry of the alleged ball shape is analyzed however, an intellectually honest person can mathematically determine that if the Earth were a globe of the dimensions claimed, we would be able to see the effects of curvature with the naked eye, and certainly would be able to see it in an airplane or using high powered optical equipment.  To the contrary, numerous long distance observations clearly demonstrate that the curvature predicted by the mainstream model of roughly [https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature 8 inches per mile squared] is never seen or measured anywhere on Earth.  These myriad counterexamples disprove the WGS-84 globe model. Using the radius of 3959 miles and other dimensions claimed by mainstream pseudoscience, we can easily determine that the claimed size of the Earth is NOT too big to verify curvature, if said curvature actually existed in objective reality.  [[Observations  | read more...]] </div>
 +
  
 
</div>
 
</div>
−
 
−
'''Q: Didn't Eratosthenes use sticks and shadows to prove that the Earth is ball-shaped?'''
 
−
 
−
A: [coming soon]
 
  
 
<div class="mw-customtoggle-myToggle5" style="cursor:pointer; color:blue">'''Q: If the Earth is flat, why isn't it always daytime everywhere?'''    [+/-] Click here to toggle]</div>
 
<div class="mw-customtoggle-myToggle5" style="cursor:pointer; color:blue">'''Q: If the Earth is flat, why isn't it always daytime everywhere?'''    [+/-] Click here to toggle]</div>
Line 46: Line 38:
  
  
 +
</div>
 +
 +
<div class="mw-customtoggle-myToggle6" style="cursor:pointer; color:blue">''''Q: Why is Earth the only flat planet?'''  [+/-] Click here to toggle]</div>
 +
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-myToggle6">
 +
<div class="toccolours mw-collapsible-content">A: This question is common and in and of itself reflects a misunderstanding about the nature of observable reality.  The alleged spherical nature of other "planets" is an unverifiable claim brought to you by the same disreputable individuals who promote the pseudoscientific globe model of Earth.  In the past, what we now call planets were called wandering stars.  It is not possible to verify these heavenly bodies as being spheres.
 +
 +
 +
Nonetheless, even if these other planets were spheres, it would not require the Earth to be a sphere.  We do not look to the sky to determine the nature of the ground upon which we stand.  The failed heliocentric model attempts to group Earth in the same category with the wandering stars, but this model fails to describe objective reality.  [[Wandering_Stars| read more ...]]</div>
 +
 +
 +
</div>
 +
 +
<div class="mw-customtoggle-myToggle7" style="cursor:pointer; color:blue">'''Q: Why would they lie?'''    [+/-] Click here to toggle]</div>
 +
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-myToggle7">
 +
<div class="toccolours mw-collapsible-content">A: This is an Appeal to Motive [[Logical Fallacies|Fallacy]] and irrelevant to the question of whether or not the globe shape claim can be verified. </div>
 +
 +
 +
</div>
 +
 +
<div class="mw-customtoggle-myToggle8" style="cursor:pointer; color:blue">'''Q: What if you as a flat earther were taken up to "outer space" and shown that the Earth is a globe.  Would you accept it then?'''    [+/-] Click here to toggle]</div>
 +
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-myToggle8">
 +
<div class="toccolours mw-collapsible-content">A: This is an Escape to the Future [[Logical Fallacies|Fallacy]] and irrelevant to the question of whether or not the globe shape claim can be verified. </div>
 +
 +
 +
</div>
 +
 +
<div class="mw-customtoggle-myToggle9" style="cursor:pointer; color:blue">'''Q: If the Earth is not spherical, why do boats disappear over the horizon?
 +
'''[+/-] Click here to toggle]</div>
 +
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-myToggle9">
 +
<div class="toccolours mw-collapsible-content">A: Boats can give the appearance of disappearing over the horizon due to natural limitations in human vision and perspective.  A high powered zoom camera, binoculars, or other optical instruments can bring the "disappeared" boat back into view, thus demonstrating that the boat indeed remained on the non-globular planar surface of reality and did not disappear behind an imaginary curve.  See also [[Affirming_the_consequent|Affirming the Consequent]]</div>
 +
 +
 +
'''Q: Didn't Eratosthenes use sticks and shadows to prove that the Earth is ball-shaped?'''
 +
 +
A: [coming soon]
  
 
'''Q: How do you have time zones without the globe model?
 
'''Q: How do you have time zones without the globe model?
Line 65: Line 92:
  
 
A: [coming soon]
 
A: [coming soon]
 +
 
 +
'''Q: Who cares if it's a globe or flat?  Why does it matter?
 +
'''
 +
 +
A: [coming soon}
  
 
'''Q: If the Earth is flat, how do you explain the Coriolis effect?'''  
 
'''Q: If the Earth is flat, how do you explain the Coriolis effect?'''  
−
 
−
A: [coming soon]
 
−
 
−
</div>
 
−
 
−
<div class="mw-customtoggle-myToggle6" style="cursor:pointer; color:blue">''''Q: Why is Earth the only flat planet?'''  [+/-] Click here to toggle]</div>
 
−
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="mw-customcollapsible-myToggle6">
 
−
<div class="toccolours mw-collapsible-content">A: This question is common and in and of itself reflects a misunderstanding about the nature of observable reality.  The alleged spherical nature of other "planets" is an unverifiable claim brought to you by the same disreputable individuals who promote the pseudoscientific globe model of Earth.  In the past, what we now call planets were called wandering stars.  It is not possible to verify these heavenly bodies as being spheres.
 
−
 
−
Nonetheless, even if these other planets were spheres, it would not require the Earth to be a sphere.  We do not look to the sky to determine the nature of the ground upon which we stand.  The failed heliocentric model attempts to group Earth in the same category with the wandering stars, but this model fails to describe objective reality.  [[Wandering_Stars| read more ...]]</div>
 
−
</div>
 
−
 
−
 
−
 
−
 
  
 
A: [coming soon]
 
A: [coming soon]
Line 89: Line 106:
 
A: [coming soon]
 
A: [coming soon]
  
−
'''Q: Why would they lie?'''
+
'''Q: Why don't you flat earthers...[get on a boat and go south, start a GoFundMe to launch a weather balloon, take this random plane trip, etc.]'''
  
 
A: [coming soon]
 
A: [coming soon]

Latest revision as of 13:54, 20 June 2023

Q: Where's The Edge? [+/-] Click here to toggle ]
A: Serious flat earthers make no claim to an edge. The concept of a flat earth having an edge generally comes from the controlled opposition dishonest flat earth parody organization known as the Flat Earth Society. No honest flat earther adheres to the straw man model of a disc flying through space which is put up as an attempt to discredit the flat earth movement and to distract from the obvious flaws inherent in the globe model. We do not know what is at the outer reaches of our realm, since the Antarctic Treaty severely restricts travel to that area. read more ...


Q: Didn't Christopher Columbus prove that the Earth is a ball? [+/-] Click here to toggle]
A: Traveling from one place to another across our realm neither requires nor proves the theoretical ball shape. Just as the hands of a clock can move from 2 o'clock to 7 o'clock, a ship can travel across a flat plane. It is only a lack of critical thinking skills that results in an indoctrinated mind thinking that the voyage of Christopher Columbus is evidence for the geometrical shape of Earth. read more ...
Circumnavigation


Q: How can you say the globe model is inaccurate when we have pictures from space? [+/-] Click here to toggle]
A: The images that are commonly thought to be photographs of a ball shaped earth are admitted to be CGI compilations right on the nasa.gov website. NASA Data Visualizer and Designer Robert Simmon has made multiple public statements about how Photoshop is used for images of the Earth. Even those images which are not outright admitted to be fabrications contain large numbers of inconsistencies and anomalies that make them suspect. Scientific evidence carries a requirement that it be testable and repeatable. Images from a realm that hasn't been verified to exist and is a violation of natural law ("outer space") taken by agencies that admit that they fabricate evidence do not meet the criteria of scientific evidence. read more ...


Q: Isn't the Earth just too big to verify the curvature? [+/-] Click here to toggle]
A: This spurious claim that the Earth is too big too verify the curve is sometimes claimed by pseudoscientific entertainers like Neil deGrasse Tyson when it suits their narrative. If the actual geometry of the alleged ball shape is analyzed however, an intellectually honest person can mathematically determine that if the Earth were a globe of the dimensions claimed, we would be able to see the effects of curvature with the naked eye, and certainly would be able to see it in an airplane or using high powered optical equipment. To the contrary, numerous long distance observations clearly demonstrate that the curvature predicted by the mainstream model of roughly 8 inches per mile squared is never seen or measured anywhere on Earth. These myriad counterexamples disprove the WGS-84 globe model. Using the radius of 3959 miles and other dimensions claimed by mainstream pseudoscience, we can easily determine that the claimed size of the Earth is NOT too big to verify curvature, if said curvature actually existed in objective reality. read more...


Q: If the Earth is flat, why isn't it always daytime everywhere? [+/-] Click here to toggle]
A: The first presupposition that needs to be discarded before this question can be properly answered is the unverifiable pseudoscientific fairy tale that the sun is located 93 million miles away from the Earth. This number is based on calculations that assume the R value of the Earth or the distance from the Earth to moon or the circular reasoning required in order to depend upon the phenomenon of parallax. Actual observations of the sun and the way that light falls upon the Earth indicate that the sun is much closer. This concept is explained well in Chapter 7 of the book Kings Dethroned.

When we leave these presuppositions behind, what we actually observe on Earth is that the sun illuminates different parts of the plane at different times. If you take a flashlight and point it at your bedroom floor at night, it only illuminates one part of the carpet at a time, and the rest of the floor is in shadow. In the same way, a close and local sun circling overhead would only illuminate one part of the world before moving on to another part. Here is a possible demonstration of how that might look, based on what we actually observe: Demonstration of Sun's Partial Illumination of a Flat Plane The globe model requires complicated mathematical calculations based on inaccurate numbers and presuppositions. Indeed it is much more difficult to explain the path of the sun when using the hypothetical globe model than it is to explain the reality of what we observe on a flat and stationary Earth.

read more ...


'Q: Why is Earth the only flat planet? [+/-] Click here to toggle]
A: This question is common and in and of itself reflects a misunderstanding about the nature of observable reality. The alleged spherical nature of other "planets" is an unverifiable claim brought to you by the same disreputable individuals who promote the pseudoscientific globe model of Earth. In the past, what we now call planets were called wandering stars. It is not possible to verify these heavenly bodies as being spheres.


Nonetheless, even if these other planets were spheres, it would not require the Earth to be a sphere. We do not look to the sky to determine the nature of the ground upon which we stand. The failed heliocentric model attempts to group Earth in the same category with the wandering stars, but this model fails to describe objective reality. read more ...


Q: Why would they lie? [+/-] Click here to toggle]
A: This is an Appeal to Motive Fallacy and irrelevant to the question of whether or not the globe shape claim can be verified.


Q: What if you as a flat earther were taken up to "outer space" and shown that the Earth is a globe. Would you accept it then? [+/-] Click here to toggle]
A: This is an Escape to the Future Fallacy and irrelevant to the question of whether or not the globe shape claim can be verified.


Q: If the Earth is not spherical, why do boats disappear over the horizon? [+/-] Click here to toggle]
A: Boats can give the appearance of disappearing over the horizon due to natural limitations in human vision and perspective. A high powered zoom camera, binoculars, or other optical instruments can bring the "disappeared" boat back into view, thus demonstrating that the boat indeed remained on the non-globular planar surface of reality and did not disappear behind an imaginary curve. See also Affirming the Consequent


Q: Didn't Eratosthenes use sticks and shadows to prove that the Earth is ball-shaped?

A: [coming soon]

Q: How do you have time zones without the globe model?

A: [coming soon]

Q: If the Earth measures flat, why can't we see forever?

A: [coming soon]

Q: Does gravity exist?

A: [coming soon]

Q: Don't eclipses prove the globe?

A: [coming soon]

Q: Who cares if it's a globe or flat? Why does it matter?

A: [coming soon}

Q: If the Earth is flat, how do you explain the Coriolis effect?

A: [coming soon]

Q: What is underneath the Earth?

A: [coming soon]

Q: Why don't you flat earthers...[get on a boat and go south, start a GoFundMe to launch a weather balloon, take this random plane trip, etc.]

A: [coming soon]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.24-7flatearth.org/index.php?title=Frequently_Asked_Questions&oldid=1400"