1 hour ago, Burma Bill said:

Do you accept that Earth is spherical -or- do you believe it is flat

 

How about bipyramid - north pole at top, south pole at bottom?

 

There's no top or bottom in space. South isn't down, north isn't up, east isn't right and west isn't left.

One thing I never understood about the flat earth is what is on the other side?

2 minutes ago, Stevemercer said:

One thing I never understood about the flat earth is what is on the other side?

 

Oh dear.....TURTLES.....all the way down....5555

 

“Turtles All the Way Down” (Western Adaptation):

• The phrase comes from a philosophical anecdote about infinite regress.

• A story describes a person claiming the Earth is flat and rests on a giant turtle. When asked what supports the turtle, they reply: “It’s turtles all the way down.”

• This idea humorously highlights the problem of infinite regression in explanations.

39 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

Oh dear.....TURTLES.....all the way down....5555

 

“Turtles All the Way Down” (Western Adaptation):

• The phrase comes from a philosophical anecdote about infinite regress.

• A story describes a person claiming the Earth is flat and rests on a giant turtle. When asked what supports the turtle, they reply: “It’s turtles all the way down.”

• This idea humorously highlights the problem of infinite regression in explanations.

Wasn't there an elephant somewhere there too?

4 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

Wasn't there an elephant somewhere there too?

 

Four!!!    One in each corner.....but that's a whole other story.....555

52 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

There's no top or bottom in space. South isn't down, north isn't up, east isn't right and west isn't left.

There is a start point, and there is possible a turning point with retraction, before everything starts all over again 😉

 

Just a pulse in time, or was it just a pulse of time

4 hours ago, JGon said:

Meanwhile, now that you are in Australia, you can see the Southern Cross (Crux). No amount of weird “perspective” or “light bending” on a supposedly flat plane can explain why completely different stars are visible as you change hemispheres. 

Not only that but each star emits light in a manner that creates a unique "fingerprint".  It can be conclusively proved that the stars visible from the Southern Hemisphere are different from those visible on the opposite hemisphere.

23 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

Gravity is strong enough to hold the oceans to a spinning ball, yet weak enough that birds can still fly?

How's your math?  The acceleration required to keep material from leaving the Earth's surface at the equator is easy to calculate.  Show us you can do this!

 

The answer is .034 m/s².  That is very small when compared to Earth's gravitational acceleration of 9.8 m/s².

 

While I have your attention..... please give the flat earther's explanation for why the same object appears to weigh more at Earth's poles than at its equator.  The answer is..... the object weighs the same but a scale shows the apparent weight not the true weight.  The apparent weight is less at the equator because ....... wait for it....... the round Earth is spinning which creates a countervailing acceleration (.034) away from the Earth.

 

1 hour ago, gamb00ler said:

How's your math?  The acceleration required to keep material from leaving the Earth's surface at the equator is easy to calculate.  Show us you can do this!

 

The answer is .034 m/s².  That is very small when compared to Earth's gravitational acceleration of 9.8 m/s².

 

While I have your attention..... please give the flat earther's explanation for why the same object appears to weigh more at Earth's poles than at its equator.  The answer is..... the object weighs the same but a scale shows the apparent weight not the true weight.  The apparent weight is less at the equator because ....... wait for it....... the round Earth is spinning which creates a countervailing acceleration (.034) away from the Earth.

 

 

Nice jargon! Water doesn't curve.

1 hour ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Nice jargon! Water doesn't curve.

 

 

5 minutes ago, kwonitoy said:

 

 

 

Please explain.

8 hours ago, KannikaP said:

What did I misunderstand please? 

 

It appears you did a bit of googling and (at least partially) copy-pasted whatever result suited what you wanted to say (as evidenced by the change in font and white background in the text, which only happens when copy-pasting from an external source).

 

If you had had the humility and patience to get acquainted with the facts presented, you would know that the Jesuits were the driving force in establishing heliocentrism. This is what @DD86 meant when he said “Specially the Jesuits part in all this is important”. But you interpreted it as being a claim the Jesuits supported the flat Earth, which demonstrates that you have no idea who the Jesuits are, nor what the political and cultural context was at the time.

 

I will take this opportunity to make a general comment on the dynamics of this thread: there are two opposing views on this matter and nobody is superior to anybody in this debate. If one doesn’t actually know what they are talking about, one takes a big risk (and risks damaging one’s credibility and relevance) by making assertive comments.

The Flat Earthers are correct. Check out this photo I took of the last lunar eclipse.

 

What I can't figure, is how the sun darkens the US and Canada when it's daytime in Thailand. Is there some giant celestial curtain? Maybe there's a matador dangling a cape in front of Taurus, and that blocks light for half the planet? Still, the sun rises slowly, so sunrise, and dusk, really puzzle me, how it is so gradual, and one man's sunset is another's sunrise. The logistics are tricky.

 

 

3 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

How's your math?  The acceleration required to keep material from leaving the Earth's surface at the equator is easy to calculate.  Show us you can do this!

 

The answer is .034 m/s².  That is very small when compared to Earth's gravitational acceleration of 9.8 m/s².

 

While I have your attention..... please give the flat earther's explanation for why the same object appears to weigh more at Earth's poles than at its equator.  The answer is..... the object weighs the same but a scale shows the apparent weight not the true weight.  The apparent weight is less at the equator because ....... wait for it....... the round Earth is spinning which creates a countervailing acceleration (.034) away from the Earth.

 

 

Please explain why this entire napkin, when dropped on the ground, isn't pulled towards the Earth's core.

 

Think.

 

 

The flat earth model doesn't allow for a 24hr sun in Antarctica.

26 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Please explain why this entire napkin, when dropped on the ground, isn't pulled towards the Earth's core.

 

It was. It went toward the core. It didn't go up or sideways and if it did it was because of wind but will eventually hit the ground. Nonsensical comment. Drop a feather and see what happens. If you're still in earth's atmosphere it will eventually land somewhere.

4 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

It was. It went toward the core. It didn't go up or sideways and if it did it was because of wind but will eventually hit the ground. Nonsensical comment. Drop a feather and see what happens. If you're still in earth's atmosphere it will eventually land somewhere.

 

Please explain how a force can be strong enough to stick trillions of gallons of water to a ball, but not enough to flatten a napkin on the surface of said ball.

13 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Please explain how a force can be strong enough to stick trillions of gallons of water to a ball, but not enough to flatten a napkin on the surface of said ball.

The earth is very big and gravity is very weak and water is heavy and paper napkin isn't. Now can you please explain how a 24hr sun in Antarctica can possibly work on a flat earth model. Only way a 24 hr. sun is possible in summer in Antarctica is due to the earths tilt and rotation relative to the sun.

7 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

The earth is very big and gravity is very weak and water is heavy and paper isn't. Now can you please explain how a 24hr sun in Antarctica can possibly work on a flat earth model. Only way a 24 hr. sun is possible in summer in Antarctica is due to the earths tilt and rotation relative to the sun.

https://geo.libretexts.org/@api/deki/files/33376/winter.solstice.jpeg?revision=1

 

The earth is very big and gravity is very weak and water is heavy and paper isn't.
That doesn't mean anything.
 

Midnight sun and Summer solstice already explained in this thread. Antartica (bar small enclave granted to the plebs) inaccessible due to Antarctic Treaty. If you wish to refute, kindly articulate rationally and refrain from posting laughing or confused emojis.

16 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

The earth is very big and gravity is very weak and water is heavy and paper isn't.
That doesn't mean anything.
 

Midnight sun and Summer solstice already explained in this thread. Antartica (bar small enclave granted to the plebs) inaccessible due to Antarctic Treaty. If you wish to refute, kindly articulate rationally and refrain from posting laughing or confused emojis.

24 hour sun. As for only certain areas being accessible this on the whole is true but because it's very dangerous. Fairly sure that the 350 odd people who have been to the South Pole aren't plebs and also fairly sure that the 4000 odd people working in Antarctica annually also aren't plebs. Every summer they will see a 24 hr. sun and if they're there in winter they won't see the sun at all. Of course in your mind this doesn't happen and is some sort of giant conspiracy. 

 

4 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Nice jargon! Water doesn't curve.

 

 

 

41 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

The earth is very big and gravity is very weak and water is heavy and paper isn't.
That doesn't mean anything.
 

Midnight sun and Summer solstice already explained in this thread. Antartica (bar small enclave granted to the plebs) inaccessible due to Antarctic Treaty. If you wish to refute, kindly articulate rationally and refrain from posting laughing or confused emojis.

Some of the greatest brains are all frauds and lie to us? All of them? 

 

Just part of the conspiracy where only 2-3 % of the world population have understood the hoax? 

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=top+10+astrophysicists&oq=top+10+astroph&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqCQgFEAAYExiABDIGCAAQRRg5MgkIARAAGBMYgAQyCQgCEAAYExiABDIJCAMQABgTGIAEMgkIBBAAGBMYgAQyCQgFEAAYExiABDIJCAYQABgTGIAEMgkIBxAAGBMYgAQyCggIEAAYExgWGB4yCggJEAAYExgWGB4yCggKEAAYExgWGB4yCggLEAAYExgWGB4yCggMEAAYExgWGB4yCggNEAAYExgWGB4yCggOEAAYExgWGB7SAQkxNTE5MWowajSoAg6wAgE&client=ms-android-samsung-ss&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

33 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

24 hour sun. As for only certain areas being accessible this on the whole is true but because it's very dangerous. Fairly sure that the 350 odd people who have been to the South Pole aren't plebs and also fairly sure that the 4000 odd people working in Antarctica annually also aren't plebs. Every summer they will see a 24 hr. sun and if they're there in winter they won't see the sun at all. Of course in your mind this doesn't happen and is some sort of giant conspiracy. 

 

 

"As for only certain areas being accessible this on the whole is true but because it's very dangerous."

 

Letting people decide where you are allowed to go or not, what is true or not, without question.

34 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

 

 

 

 

 

Water always remains level.

Water drops are round because of a phenomenon called "surface tension", which is caused by the cohesive forces between water molecules, making them naturally pull together to form a spherical shape that minimizes their surface area, essentially acting like a "skin" on the water drop.

12 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

"As for only certain areas being accessible this on the whole is true but because it's very dangerous."

 

Letting people decide where you are allowed to go or not, what is true or not, without question.

Try climbing Mt. Everest without a permit. A very, very expensive permit at that. So what's your point.

1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

Try climbing Mt. Everest without a permit. A very, very expensive permit at that. So what's your point.

 

You and I can climb Everest anytime. We can't go to Antartica. That's my point.

3 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

 

Water always remains level.

Water drops are round because of a phenomenon called "surface tension", which is caused by the cohesive forces between water molecules, making them naturally pull together to form a spherical shape that minimizes their surface area, essentially acting like a "skin" on the water drop.

You have been indoctrinated fully if you believe Dave Weiss the man that says a 24 hr. sun is impossible in Antarctica. 

1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

You have been indoctrinated fully if you believe Dave Weiss the man that says a 24 hr. sun is impossible in Antarctica. 

 

The process of believing one's eyes and common sense independently, breaking free from the doxa in spite of the massive social pressure and vilification, is the opposite of indoctrination.

 

Dave Weiss is a pretty reliable source of information among others, IMO.

31 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Some of the greatest brains are all frauds and lie to us? All of them? 

 

Just part of the conspiracy where only 2-3 % of the world population have understood the hoax? 

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=top+10+astrophysicists&oq=top+10+astroph&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqCQgFEAAYExiABDIGCAAQRRg5MgkIARAAGBMYgAQyCQgCEAAYExiABDIJCAMQABgTGIAEMgkIBBAAGBMYgAQyCQgFEAAYExiABDIJCAYQABgTGIAEMgkIBxAAGBMYgAQyCggIEAAYExgWGB4yCggJEAAYExgWGB4yCggKEAAYExgWGB4yCggLEAAYExgWGB4yCggMEAAYExgWGB4yCggNEAAYExgWGB4yCggOEAAYExgWGB7SAQkxNTE5MWowajSoAg6wAgE&client=ms-android-samsung-ss&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

 

I know you're not ready to go there yet, Hummin, and as I said, I get it. Keep on asking questions, stay honest and open, breaking away from the deception is a slow process (it took several years in my case).