Author Topic: 50 Plus Reasons The Earth Is Not Flat (Read 218401 times)

happenby · « **Reply #270 on:** March 09, 2017, 01:26:37 AM »

For further understanding of this subject, here is a noteworthy professional on the subject of latitude and longitude.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za42.htm

happenby · « **Reply #271 on:** March 09, 2017, 01:57:57 AM »

The Principle of the Sextant. The optical principle used in a sextant is this: given that a ray of light is reflected from two mirrors in succession, then the angle between the first and last direction of the ray is twice the angle between the mirrors.

Marine Navigational Equipment: The Sextant
written by: Manu • edited by: Lamar Stonecypher • updated: 5/14/2013
Many of us have seen photographs of seamen using a marine sextant. What exactly is that navigator measuring? Learn how a sextant works to help marine navigators find their position.

Sextant Navigation - The Altitudes
sextant

In marine navigation, when a navigator measures the altitude of a celestial body with a marine sextant he has to measure the altitude as an angle of the body above the visible horizon.

The altitude thus obtained has to be corrected for instrument and other errors before calculations can be made.

The Marine Sextant

The sextant derives its name from the extent of its limb which is the sixth part of a circle, or 60 degrees. The marine sextant is a double reflection instrument, used for measuring angles in then same plane. The arc is graduated into degrees from right to left from 0 to 120 (sometimes a little more). However the limb is only 1/6th of a circle due to the instrument double Reflecting.

To the right of 0 degrees on the arc is graduated 5 degrees. This arc of excess is called ‘Off the arc’, and the arc to the left of the zero is termed ‘On the arc’.

The sextant can be used to measure angles in vertical, horizontal or oblique PLANES.

http://www.brighthubengineering.com/seafaring/31615-marine-navigational-equipment-the-sextant/

happenby · « **Reply #272 on:** March 09, 2017, 02:07:13 AM »

Now that we have well established that a sextant is designed to work with parallel lines, reflecting mirrors, line of sight and degrees of an arc, (not the globe earth,) that they measure planes, and that the measurements are recorded on a grid map, I think its safe to say, along with gyros, astrolabes, compasses, bubble levels etc, the earth measured by such things is proven not a globe.

FlatEarthInquisitor · « **Reply #273 on:** March 09, 2017, 07:20:40 AM »

Neil,
You should watch the following video which explains how the stars work in the flat earth.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/ahNfU7zYlmY[/youtube]

are you interested though?

There isn't much point having a conversation with you, because you ignore anything that you don't like. You still have failed to answer where the missing hundreds of feet came from way back a few months ago. This seeing of objects is THE proof par excellence of the flat earth, and you have not answered it.

BTW what is my remarking on your unhappiness indicative of?

But to go back to navigation, I'm at a loss as to why anything you show proves curvature on the earth. Can you explain? Have you studied the flat earth maps? Have you tried to conceive how it would work on a flat earth model?

mw2016 · « **Reply #274 on:** March 09, 2017, 10:02:27 AM »

Quote from: noOneImportant

Stop being needlessly pedantic and condescending, and make an argument. I agree with you and I still find you almost as infuriating as the deluded people in this thread.

I just thumbed-up NoOne's post about Neil - unbelievable...haha.

mw2016 · « **Reply #275 on:** March 09, 2017, 10:05:07 AM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Especially noteworthy is minute 5:15 when Mr. Buckley says for the purposes of celestial navigation the earth is presumed motionless with the sun continually moving around it. His model shown at that point speaks for itself. It would make no sense whatsoever if the earth were "flat."

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/Xz0VazejX1Q[/youtube]

"...for the purposes of navigation.." ???

No, it is assumed motionless with the sun moving above because that is REALITY.

Tell me how you arrive at the conclusion "it would make no sense if the earth were flat."

It makes PERFECT sense.

mw2016 · « **Reply #276 on:** March 09, 2017, 10:07:49 AM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

But if the earth were flat, the angle between the north star, Polaris, and the horizon, would always be the same, regardless of latitude.

Not at all.

Why did you make this ASSumption?

noOneImportant · « **Reply #277 on:** March 09, 2017, 01:05:41 PM »

Quote from: mw2016

Quote from: Neil Obstat

But if the earth were flat, the angle between the north star, Polaris, and the horizon, would always be the same, regardless of latitude.

Not at all.

mw is correct. Why is everyone in this thread so bad at geometry? It is trivial to show the curvature of the earth with basic geometry. The greeks did it over 2000 years ago.

Truth is Eternal · « **Reply #278 on:** March 09, 2017, 02:07:30 PM »

Quote from: noOneImportant

Quote from: mw2016
Quote from: Neil Obstat

But if the earth were flat, the angle between the north star, Polaris, and the horizon, would always be the same, regardless of latitude.

Not at all.

mw is correct. Why is everyone in this thread so bad at geometry? It is trivial to show the curvature of the earth with basic geometry. The greeks did it over 2000 years ago.

There is no curvature to the earth.

Matto · « **Reply #279 on:** March 09, 2017, 02:17:33 PM »

As much as I think about the flat earth I focus on one point that I cannot understand. The sun's movement in the sky. I cannot reconcile how the sun moves in the sky with the flat earth models I have seen. If in the flat earth model the sun rose from the east and set in the west and at night went below the flat earth it would make sense and the sun would move the same way as it is observed but then you would have to say there is a vast conspiracy about time zones, but the model where the sun is moving around in a big circle over the flat earth and never sets just does not seem to fit the way the sun moves in the sky. So I do not believe it.

ManuelChavez · « **Reply #280 on:** March 09, 2017, 04:21:43 PM »

Quote from: Truth is Eternal

Quote from: noOneImportant
Quote from: mw2016
Quote from: Neil Obstat

But if the earth were flat, the angle between the north star, Polaris, and the horizon, would always be the same, regardless of latitude.

Not at all.

mw is correct. Why is everyone in this thread so bad at geometry? It is trivial to show the curvature of the earth with basic geometry. The greeks did it over 2000 years ago.

There is no curvature to the earth.

Those are all panoramic shots, and by their nature, would not exhibit any curve.

Panoramic shots are designed to work in this way, so these shots in and of themselves do not prove a flat earth, nor do they disprove a globe earth.

If you are going to claim that NASA's photos of the globe earth are fake, then you cannot use photos that have been stitched together by computer software to claim the earth is flat.

That is illogical.

happenby · « **Reply #281 on:** March 09, 2017, 05:02:51 PM »

Quote from: ManuelChavez

Quote from: Truth is Eternal
Quote from: noOneImportant
Quote from: mw2016
Quote from: Neil Obstat

But if the earth were flat, the angle between the north star, Polaris, and the horizon, would always be the same, regardless of latitude.

Not at all.

mw is correct. Why is everyone in this thread so bad at geometry? It is trivial to show the curvature of the earth with basic geometry. The greeks did it over 2000 years ago.

There is no curvature to the earth.

Those are all panoramic shots, and by their nature, would not exhibit any curve.

Panoramic shots are designed to work in this way, so these shots in and of themselves do not prove a flat earth, nor do they disprove a globe earth.

If you are going to claim that NASA's photos of the globe earth are fake, then you cannot use photos that have been stitched together by computer software to claim the earth is flat.

That is illogical.

Ok, do show, anything at all, that proves curve commensurate with a 24,000 mile ball. Your own personal tests, someone else's tests, photos, whatever. Please only untouched, non cgi, not photoshopped evidence. But I'll take anything at all.

Just to save you time and effort if you were to try, let me admit to you that no one to date has produced this evidence and I've been doing flat earth for almost 10 years now. Why? Because they know it doesn't exist. NASA provides glorious photoshops of all sorts of things in outer space, yet not one true video of the rotating earth. Seriously? Not one single photo of the ball earth. NOT ONE!!! BY NASA'S OWN ADMISSION! So, please explain to me where is your evidence that earth is a ball?

Let me guess, you think earth is a ball...

1. Because NASA says so.
2. Because somebody says a shadow on the moon is curved.
3. Because teachers said so.
4. Because somebody said that flat earth is stupid.
5. Because everybody else says its true.
6. Because somebody says that the stars and sun and moon wouldn't work on flat earth.
7. Because somebody said ships disappear over the horizon.
8. Because somebody said astronauts saw it.

Wow. 100% of heliocentrism theory held by individuals is unsubstantiated, undocuмented, unphotographed, untenable HEARSAY! I really want to understand why good Catholics maintain heliocentric theory, when the Catholic Church condemned heliocentrism? Scripture only describes a flat immovable earth. Church Fathers condemned heliocentric theory, including sphericity of earth, based on scripture, yet Catholics still have the nerve to hold this blatantly condemned proposition.

Maybe you could explain that to me. I really don't get it. What are people holding on to?

noOneImportant · « **Reply #282 on:** March 09, 2017, 05:03:15 PM »

Quote from: Truth is Eternal

Quote from: noOneImportant
Quote from: mw2016
Quote from: Neil Obstat

But if the earth were flat, the angle between the north star, Polaris, and the horizon, would always be the same, regardless of latitude.

Not at all.

mw is correct. Why is everyone in this thread so bad at geometry? It is trivial to show the curvature of the earth with basic geometry. The greeks did it over 2000 years ago.

There is no curvature to the earth.

I made a very long post somewhere in one of the 30 threads on this topic about conclusions that can and can't be drawn from horizon pictures like these. The long and the short of it is that to actual get measurable curvature*, you have to be at around 30,000 feet, have at least 60 degrees field of view, and have be careful to minimize lens distortion**. Those pictures prove nothing, and parroting statements while reposting them over and over isn't an argument that will convince a rational human being.

tl;dr - photographs of the "flat" horizon are rarely, if ever, useful in these arguments. Also pictures are easy to manipulate, so there's that to worry about as well.

* based on a earth with 4k mile radius, as per the "globe model".

** Lens distortion is a real issue, because lenses are round, so you can actually take a photograph of a flat line and have it be curved up, curved down, or flat, depending on how careful you are. Likewise, you can take a picture of a curved surface and distort that curvature so it isn't noticeable.

happenby · « **Reply #283 on:** March 09, 2017, 05:16:59 PM »

Quote from: Matto

As much as I think about the flat earth I focus on one point that I cannot understand. The sun's movement in the sky. I cannot reconcile how the sun moves in the sky with the flat earth models I have seen. If in the flat earth model the sun rose from the east and set in the west and at night went below the flat earth it would make sense and the sun would move the same way as it is observed but then you would have to say there is a vast conspiracy about time zones, but the model where the sun is moving around in a big circle over the flat earth and never sets just does not seem to fit the way the sun moves in the sky. So I do not believe it.

God mocked Job for his arrogance, citing the fact that no one was there for the laying of the foundations of earth, nor understanding the celestial clockwork of heaven. There is a lot we don't know, but there is a lot we do know. For instance, we know for certain that ships do not disappear over the curve. We know for certain that the horizon rises to eye level no matter how high one goes, and that on a ball, the horizon would actually descend in order to be a ball. We know for certain that the coriolis force and foucault pendulums were scams to try to prove round moving earth. We know for certain that there is a hard dome above earth forming a tent like structure over the earth with water above the dome. We know NASA has lied about the moonlandings, photoshopped pictures of earth and heavens with the intent to indoctrinate and steal billions of dollars from the unsuspecting public. I could go on and on, but that should be sufficient. One thing is certain for me: all my life I never really looked up for long. Now I do it constantly. I take pictures of the stars and moon and observe their actions, I ponder creation and God's intent for showing it to me, and I thank God for providing me a clearer picture of where He resides: above.

Truth is Eternal · « **Reply #284 on:** March 09, 2017, 05:26:41 PM »

Quote from: ManuelChavez

Quote from: Truth is Eternal
Quote from: noOneImportant
Quote from: mw2016
Quote from: Neil Obstat

But if the earth were flat, the angle between the north star, Polaris, and the horizon, would always be the same, regardless of latitude.

Not at all.

mw is correct. Why is everyone in this thread so bad at geometry? It is trivial to show the curvature of the earth with basic geometry. The greeks did it over 2000 years ago.

There is no curvature to the earth.

Those are all panoramic shots, and by their nature, would not exhibit any curve.

Panoramic shots are designed to work in this way, so these shots in and of themselves do not prove a flat earth, nor do they disprove a globe earth.

If you are going to claim that NASA's photos of the globe earth are fake, then you cannot use photos that have been stitched together by computer software to claim the earth is flat.

That is illogical.

I have seen the flat-earth horizon with my very own eyes and it exactley the same as in the pictures I posted of the flat-horizon.