I think this deserves its own thread. As it was one of the first things that really made me investigate FE last summer: this utter emotionalism attached to the globe earth model. I first came across it on Gab when you would receive such utter vitriol and hatred for even questioning the shape of the earth. And we have seen it here repeatedly when discussing the subject in it's own proper sub-forum.


My takeaway is that disproving GE is the peg which would bring down the entire modern cosmological system. As everything that is taken for granted about the nature of God's creation that has been promoted over the past 500+ years appears to be tied to heliocentrism, and therefore, by extension, the shape of the earth. We are now in an era where measurements of the earth's curvature can be accurately docuмented, and has shown that there are serious issues with the common acceptance of the visibility of curvature from ground-level, coupled with the massive psy-op that is the international space program.

I would just like to understand WHY people get so emotional over the subject to the point that they put all charity aside? (And this applies to both FE and GE proponents).

My two cents: Globers are terrified of the responsibility that comes with the whole truth.  If a lie as big as the globe was allowed to resonate with them and they actually permit themselves to recognize it, they are obliged to do something about it. That's bad enough, but if they do something about it, they know they'll be ridiculed or worse. After all, they sense it would be a honker of a lie capable of threatening their way of life. But I think it goes deeper than that.  It is the basis for the way they deal with sin.  A flat earth world is straight forward.  Up is up.  Down is down.  East is east and West is west. Water is flat.  Heaven is above.  Hell is below. Reality is all so much more black and white.  On the other hand, with the globe you get options. Metaphysically, physically, even spiritually, everything is relative on a globe. You get east and west (good and bad) to actually meet in the back somewhere.  The direction "up" is truly up only for part of the world's population.  Down is down for some, just not in the same way as it is for those on the under side of the globe.  Think about it: Every single solitary glober thinks level actually means curve. They are more likely to believe in evolution, million year old planets, life on other planets, the infinite of space, because they trust science based lies over Scripture. We all know they love to say that Scripture isn't supposed to be taken literally. A round earth mentality enables people to hide from God, around the corner as it were, spiritually speaking, in the sphere of their own mind. The kind of relativity that the globe provides is the basis for effeminacy and luxury. And many people do not want to give that up.         

I think we saw a glimpse of it in the post to which I was responding there.  You spend your entire life trying to be patriotic, saying the Pledge of Allegiance, saluting the flag, denouncing the flag burners and the kneelers, and some of us lived through the Cold War as we watched crowds chanting "USA! USA! USA!" during the US vs. Soviet Olympic Hockey matches.  We were PROUD, extremely proud, of the fact that the US won the space race and beat the Ruskies to it ... one of the greatest achievement of mankind.  What utter humiliation that would if it were definitively exposed that these were a fraud.  US could never live that down, and our national pride would never recover from such a blow.

Patriotism is a virtue, but I became a Traditional Catholic and learned that "Freedom of Religion" wasn't this great thing it was cracked up to be and saw the evils of the French revolution, to which the US revolution was closely related.  I had always been proud of the US effort in WW2.  Then I learned that the entire war was a Globalist fraud.  I used to enjoy saluting the WW2 veterans that would make appearances in parades and whatnot.  But then I realized that the nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were crimes against humanity, as was the bombing of Dresden.  I used to oppose the Hippies who protested against the Vietnam war, but then I realized that the whole thing was a fraud staged by the Military Industrial Complex (and learned about Gulf of Tonkin).  We found out about 9/11, and from there the floodgates were opened.  Pretty much everything was a lie.  Everything.  So this is very difficult to take.

Some people get into science and physics, and they learn a lot of neat and interesting things.  We grow up with globe and planet mobiles over our cribs and see a globe the minute we walk into a classroom.  By 2nd or 3rd grade we're building solar system models with styrofoam balls.  Some of us get into science fiction.  I was an avid fan of Star Trek and also enjoyed Star Wars (to a lesser extent).

It's difficult to learn that everything you thought you know and believed in and supported was a total lie.  It's heartbreaking really.

I recall when I first came to the conclusion that the earth is certainly flat.  It was shocking.  My entire life I thought one thing about the universe and creation, and to realize that it was a lie for 53 years, that's hard to take.  I tend to encourage those against FE to make a thought experiment.  Just imagine for a minute that you did come to know for a fact that the earth is flat.  Try to then experience the emotions you'd feel upon finding that out.  Your brain just kindof spins.

By the time I had started looking into FE, a lot of my "paradigm" had already shifted, with 9/11 and all the other things I mentioned before, so the thought that the government would lie to us and that we're controlled around the world by our Jєωιѕн globalist masters, that part was not shocking to me.  And so it was for that reason that I at least decided to look at the evidence with an open mind.  But this one was still difficult to swallow, 1) because we have been strongly programmed with this our entire lives, and 2) because FE is absolutely ridiculed and Flat Earther has become synonyous in common parlance with "nutjob".  It's not easy to take the constant ridicule.

But I submit, as I did in the post that you cited that if it were THAT crazy, people wouldn't be hostile to it.  They'd just make the circular motion with their finger by their ear as they walked past.  So, as I suggested, the reason is two-fold.

1) there are a lot of good, strong arguments and compelling evidence for the position (it's not so far out in left field as to be ludicrous)
2) it threatens people psychologically for the reasons I articulated above

If EITHER one of these weren't the case, then we wouldn't have people out there almost dedicating their lives to debunking it.  If it was so insane as to not even be remotely credible, people wouldn't feel threatened by it.  But, then, if the evidence were overhwelming, people wouldn't be so hostile to it if it didn't threaten them on some deep psychological level.  In that case, they would actually consider the arguments objectively and with an open mind.

And the fact that the FE movement is growing (despite Big Tech suppression) means that there's enough evidence out there to make it very, very compelling to intelligent people.  Lots of people have an aversion to being classified and derided and mocked as lunatics, and yet they come to believe it anyway.  Every single one of the main FE proponents tells the same story.  When they first started looking into it, they too thought it was ridiculous and mocked it and wrote it off.  Many of them set out to debunk it, but then ended up finding themselves won over.

What I see with nearly all the ardent defenders of Globe Earth is that they have CLEARLY made up their minds ahead of time.  They beg the question, and then engage in confirmation bias, taking whatever evidence they can find in favor of their position as definitive smoking-gun slam-dunk proof, and then filtering out the evidence that suggests the contrary (after all, we KNOW the earth is a globe, so it must be wrong).  So it's just a question of coming up with a reason WHY it's wrong.  THAT it's wrong is never in doubt in their minds.  And that's a huge block that prevents them from really and honestly considering the position.

After I came to the FE conclusion, I did what I always do on such issues.  It's like a scholastic method.  I pretended that I'm a Globe Earther and am trying to prove to a Flat Earther that the earth is a globe.  I find that I simply can't do it.  I'm not talking about sophistry where I say, "look at these pictures from NASA" (because I honestly can't trust NASA as far as I can throw a Space Shuttle).  I'm not talking about sophistry where I would just say the magic word "refraction" while waving my magic wand to make stuff go away.  It's easy to say that refraction COULD cause the "see too far phenomenon" ... EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE.  But to claim that it's almost universally present and tht "see too far" is so easily and readily reproducible, and that this refraction just perfectly curves around the globe in the same ratio, and that it even works bi-directionally when you have to have an increasing density gradient, but then if it's increasing in one direction, it would be increasing in the other.  I simply can't believe that all that long-distance photography from 300+ miles away showing mountains that should be hidden under miles of curvature are simply refracted perfectly around the globe.  I can't believe that a pressurized atmosphere can exist adjacent to a vacuum.  I could sophistically say, muh gravity, but I don't believe that the force of gravity is anywhere nearly strong enough to prevent an infinite vacuum of space from just ripping the atmosphere off the planet.  I see these steel tanker cars absolutely crushed because there's a vacuum inside and yet I'm supposed to believe that gravity, which can't hold a helium balloon down on the ground could overcome this.  If I put a vacuum chamber above a chamber filled with air, it'll "suck" the air right out of the chamber without gravity being able to keep it down in the lower chamber.  I could go on and on, but I find that I could not convincingly argue the globe position.  I've done the same thing with, say, evolution.  I'm trying to prove evolution to someone who doesn't believe in it.  I couldn't even come close to making a good argument for it.

And the fact that the FE movement is growing (despite Big Tech suppression) means that there's enough evidence out there to make it very, very compelling to intelligent people. 

If we have learned anything from the past 10 years, it's that the truth is usually (but, not always) censored and buried by Big Tech. And there's even those who admit that FE isn't dumb, they just think it's wrong.


Which comes back to an original observation I had about this "movement": which is that of presuppositions. If you start from the presupposition that the earth is a globe, then it logically follows that data will be interpreted in such a way to make all cosmological observations adhere to that basis. And the same can be said of FE. For example, gravity: this is a divergence between FE and GE, because GE absolutely requires some sort of force acting upon objects to explain how they would adhere to the globe. Whereas, FE does not require such a force because density and buoyancy suffice to explain directionality and mobility on a flat plane; with even electromagnetism being the go-to for adherents of both FE and GE. When the GE adherents faces the FE adherent on the topic of gravity, they are incredulous that the FE adherent would reject this theory because it is to essential to their ideas of the nature of the earth, but it isn't essential to the FE adherent. Therefore, conflict.

We see this occur amongst the geocentric vs heliocentric debate, as the presuppositions of geocentrism diverge from that of heliocentrism. Leading to differing interpretations of the data. It is more a philosophical problem, at its root, than a merely empirical one. As depending on how you interpret data (what you already presuppose about the world) is going to determine what the outcome (hypothesis/theory) from that data will be. Unfortunately, there is no neutral ground in this matter as philosophy is going to creep in somewhere. And we see this with the constant back-and-forth between FE and GE adherents about refraction, where sometimes it is visible and atmospheric qualities cause a mirage versus it always being visible and explaining why we can see further than the supposed curve.

Sorry to bump, but i've been looking into this myself. It's clear the round shape on windows on airplanes makes world look curved... What really got me to believe in FL was the whole "Antarctica" thing. And water cant "flow up". The whole gravity thing makes no sense to me either. When it come to the globe thing, I think the globe represents the universe as a whole, not "earth". You could encompass a flat earth in a sphere.

While I definitely agree with your second point, the figure of the earth and the nature of the universe around us are of key importance to all humans on earth and we actually rely on knowing the truth about this question in our every day lives, more so in modern days than in the past, whether we realize it or not.

Fact of the matter is, the more educated people are (academically or not), the less likely it is that they'll be flat earthers.

For some people it's just mind-blowing how someone can believe something so outlandish and unproven, diametrically contradicting hundreds of years of empirical observations, measurements, research and practical fields relying on knowledge of these matters. And I think this is definitely in part where the hostility comes from.

How does the earth being flat vs a globe actually impact me though? It seems more like it erodes people's trust in NASA and the power of speculation.

How does the earth being flat vs a globe actually impact me though? It seems more like it erodes people's trust in NASA and the power of speculation.

My sense is that the flat Earth is absurd but I've never heard that it's a heresy. Heliocentrism, however, is a heresy and it's absurd too.

One should not have confidence in ʝʊdɛօ-Masonic controlled NASA anyway, since they are Satanically influenced and full of lies.

What "power of speculation" is in reference? Dreams? Be careful about being too dreamy, the Bible says dreams have cause many to go astray. "The hopes of a man that is void of understanding are vain and deceitful: and dreams lift up fools. For dreams have deceived many, and they have failed that put their trust in them."

In the flat Earth too everybody needs to be on one side otherwise they might fall off.