.
Here's another one. Note, "Sacred Word publishing" jab.
.
.
Tony Flury, Open Source Software Developer - Python (2015-present)
Updated Mar 30, 2017
Edit : A good night's sleep, and I have a few more things to add.
Scientific methodThe established scientific theory that explains the shape of the Earth, is one which shows that the Earth is more or less spherical (the model actually says that the Earth isn’t a perfect sphere—for a number of reasons). The scientific methods that all scientists should follow is that when someone comes up with an alternative model, that model should be able to:
- Identify exactly how that model matches all known observations
- How the new model differs from the old model—what observations can one make that prove the new model.
It simply isn’t good enough for Flat Earth proponents to say,
“I don’t believe in a Spherical Earth; prove it.” As far as science is concerned, that was done millennia ago (the Ancient Greeks identified that the earth was Spherical in 600 BC). What is needed is for proponents of the Flat Earth model is to prove that their model is true. So where is that verifiable proof? (It has to be measurable and independently verifiable—falling back on the ‘all scientists are part of a conspiracy’ isn’t a good enough reason to reject anyone else’s involvement.)
The scientific community are more than happy to reject established models if someone comes along with a better model which more closely matches the measurements—some big examples:
- —The earth-centric model (Ptolemy and earlier); rejected by Copernicus and others.
- —Newtonian gravity; rejected by Einstein.
- —Earth, Fire, Water Air elements (ancient Greeks & Romans); rejected by Dalton and others during the 1600s
- —One Galaxy (ancient times); rejected by Hubble and all in the early 1900s
Spherical EarthFor me the spherical Earth is not anything that is up for debate; I have seen no evidence that would suggest to me that the world isn’t pretty close to a sphere. If you want proof, here are a few things:
—Sun rise, sun set: It is well known that for very tall buildings (Burj Khalifa in UAE for instance) that there is a measurable time difference between sun rise at the top, and sun rise at the bottom; so much so that for residents of apartments at the top the Muslim fast of Ramadan starts a few minutes earlier and finishes a few minutes later, than those who live on the ground floor.
—Lunar Eclipses: When we get a lunar eclipse the shadow of the earth (both the umbra and the penumbra) are always round, and all parts of the world experience lunar eclipses at one time or another. The ONLY shape that gives a round shadow from which ever angle you light it, is a sphere. A flat object will only give a circular shadow if light from directly above/ below, and at all other angles the shadows will range from a noticeable ellipse, to a rectangle. This is leaving aside the fact that we know that the lunar eclipses are the result of the Earth being in between the Sun and the Moon, and that the Flat Earth model suggests that the Sun is always above the Earth ‘disc’ in order to assure that it is always daytime somewhere—so how it can be above the disc and also below it at the same time is beyond me.
Movement of the EarthRotation around the SunIt is actually pretty difficult to ‘prove’ the Earth is moving; the model of the universe that is the norm is that everything is moving, that nothing is stationary, and that crucially you can only measure your movement relative to something else. I can easily show you that, during the year, the Earth moves relative to the background stars (we see different constellations during the winter, than during the summer). I can show you that the surface of the earth moves relative to the Sun and moon during the day (sunrise, sunset, etc). There are experiments that prove that the solar system is moving relative to the background galactic ‘stuff’ (dust, gas) and relative to other nearby star systems (such as with observation of parallax).
However it is possible to ‘claim’ that actually the Earth is stationary and everything else is moving relative to us; the main argument against this is primarily one of simplicity. When you take everything into account, the movement of many of the things into the universe would be incredibly complicated if the Earth was stationary (look at the Ptolemy model of just the solar system with its orbits, epicycles, etc.—the movement of the rest of the universe would be equally as complex if not more). Once you realise that if you assume that solar system orbits the sun in a simple ellipse, and the solar system orbits the galactic center, that other stars are doing the same (at different velocities), and that the galaxies are moving simply due to gravity, all of the movement path are simply much much easier.
Conspiracy TheoriesMy final point is that Flat Earth proponents include a conspiracy theory as part of the model, and therefore to try to prove that the Flat Earth model is wrong you not only have to prove the science, you also have to try to prove that the secret worldwide, millennium-old conspiracy between governments, scientists and other organizations simply does not exist. Given that, people probably know they would be wasting their time. They would conduct the experiments/demonstrations and prove what they are trying to prove and the ‘Sacred Word Publishing’ still would not pay up.
If you read any flat Earth vs spherical Earth debates on the Internet, the Flat Earth proponents have always got a reason why any given experiment isn’t valid, and there is nothing to suggest that
‘Sacred Word publishing’ would be any different.
If the money was put up by a totally independent body, and the results were reviewed and arbitrated on by a totally independent panel, then maybe people would be interested, but even then the Flat Earth proponents would be likely to debate the validity of the results.
It is a hallmark of many Flat Earth proponents that they seem to believe in an overarching conspiracy spanning many centuries (possibly even a millennium or more) by unnamed organizations (but currently NASA) to convince the population that the world is spherical. By the very nature of the conspiracy anyone who disagrees with them (they say) has been convinced by the conspiracy hoax, and any scientist who argues for the Spherical earth evidence (they say) is part of the conspiracy. When people are convinced by the conspiracy theory it is very difficult for anyone to convince them otherwise.
Interestingly they are claiming a conspiracy to deceive the population for around 1000 years, and they can’t explain:
— What benefit does any organization get from propagating this hoax? The only exception is NASA, who apparently perpetuates the hoax in order to continue getting funding. This doesn't explain any of the non-USA proponents of the spherical earth, including many with no NASA connection, and it doesn't explain the spherical earth proponents for many 100s of years before NASA.
— Why has not a single spherical earth proponent 'spilt the beans,' and exposed the hoax—despite the hoax apparently running for centuries? Criminal cօռspιʀαcιҽs break apart fairly often (even when the penalty is incarceration or worse), yet we are expected to believe that this conspiracy has remained water-tight over centuries and over the entire world! Not a single "confession," not even a death-bed confession!
Update : Updated section on Earth’s movement to include direct evidence from Gyroscopes, Focault’s Pendulum & the Coriolis Effect.
Topic: How does "flat-earthism" defame Church, providing material for ridicule thereof? (Read 4246 times)