There are many ways to tell that the earth is round. Thinking about whether the earth is flat is pretty much a waste of time, and not a blind assumption. Considering that we have pictures from space that show that the earth is spherical, and people have seen the earth from space there is no way that our models are wrong.

but it would be useful to investigate a site like that in order to learn more about how these ideas persist. you can learn about the kind of people who believe them, and you can practice your own thinking by studying their arguments for it and learning how to refute them. i mean you can do all this without even corresponding with them, as an exercise. i like to know what everyone is up to in the world...it is a scary place and there are a lot of sites that show what kind of people there are so we wont be surprised, if you know what i mean

You can tell that the Earth is round by the moon.

I do agree with you on that. I have a friend that didn't believe in negetive numbers; only because noone explained it correctly to her. People would try to explain by telling her something like, "If you have 10 dollars and you buy something for 12 dollars you have -2 dollars." But she didn't accept that because that's not negetive it's just owing 2 dollars. Then her uncle explained it in a way that made sense using above and below sea level.

I think I understand the point of what you are saying but that was, honestly, the worst example ever. No offense, but a better example would have help you out tremendously in getting your point across.

A better example would be those who believe in a benevolent god.you dont have to go far to find them and no amount of reasoning will convince them they are wrong.Both are equally and easily disputed but logic for both are sadly missing.

All ideas are worth at least a moment of time... if for no other reason than to gain understanding into the obvious delusion of another...

Yes. I too have made this observation. It seems like we all harbor our own biases, myths, prejudices, based upon our own personal experiences and the culture/society we populate. It is an interesting observation you make, and one that I think helps one grow, if applied to oneself and not to others. Thanks.

Rich

ok.
to be certain that the solar system model fits personal observation, do the following:

1) make a systematic observation of the path that mars traverses relative to the 'fixed' stars in the night sky. You will need to record it every week or so for about a year.

2) find a solar system game online, and position your perspective on the innermost of two orbiting planets

3) you will notice that from this perspective mars will loop forwards, go backwards briefly, and then loop forwards again, exactly as one observes it for real.

Its one thing to believe a certain thing,
its another to have explored it in detail as to be mathematically certain of it.

Yeah thats what I thought. they really do have an explaination for everything.I promise you. To every argument there is about why the earth is round they do have a well explaint point saying your basis of guessing that is from other predjudise or there is a higher truth. There not a butch of morons. Even if they are wrong. Witch I think they probably are. There still not stupid.

---------- Post added 07-22-2009 at 05:59 PM ----------



google them and check out there forum. Its not as bad of an example as you might think. Infact Its a good example.

---------- Post added 07-22-2009 at 06:02 PM ----------



Maybe you should post that in there forum and see what they say. Post a link to your post so we can discuss it here

Its a really popular forum. And the guys in it really arent as crazy as you would think they are.

No, really, they are crazy. They may be functional and otherwise reasonable human beings, but to believe that the earth is flat is crazy.

Seriously: the sight the UN flag as evidence of a flat earth. That's almost funny. And it's definitely mad.

Haha yeah. Alot of them are in denile because of there religion so they dont rationally seek good explainations.

---------- Post added 07-23-2009 at 07:26 AM ----------



Would it be okay if I put links to some of there forum posts here?

Regardless of their particular infirmaries, claiming that the world is flat is ridiculous. All a person has to do is watch a ship sail over the horizon - as Aristotle pointed out many years ago, the top of the mast is the first aspect to appear.

And, no, no links to that forum. A link to the Wiki article or something similar to that would be acceptable, but not to the forum.

If you can fantasize that gravity will play tricks on the senses as does heat, creating a mirage, then the possibility that the universe is flat, with only sky above, seems plausible. What stikes me, is denying truth in the face of speculation, while condemning speculative insight to a percieved truth. So raise your hand if you think I mean you.

The earth is flat. Moon landings were a hoax. Amy winehouse is attractive.

Heres there answer to that. And all of there physics ones.

Physics

Q: "What is the circumference and diameter of the Earth?"

Circumference: 78,225 miles
Diameter: 24,900 miles

In John Davis's model, the Earth is an infinite plane and is 9000 kilometers deep.

Q: "What about the stars, sun and moon and other planets? Are they flat too? What are they made of?"

A1: The sun and moon, each 32 miles in diameter, rotate at a height of 3000 miles above sea level. As they are spotlights, they only illuminate certain places. This explains why there are nights and days on Earth.

A2: In James McIntyre's model, the sun and the moon are metallic discs. These discs are being held above the Earth by photoelectric effect. See: Photoelectric Suspension Theory.

The stars are at a height of 3100 miles above sea level, which is as far as from San Francisco to Boston.

Q: "Please explain sunrises/sunsets."

A: It's a perspective effect. Really, the sun is just getting farther away; it looks like it's disappearing because everything gets smaller, and eventually disappears as it gets farther away.

UPDATE:The theory of Electromagnetic Acceleration is currently being developed and reviewed by members. Once completed, Electromagnetic Acceleration will be used as an alternative in explaining sunrises, sunsets and horizons for the general model only.

Q: "Why are other celestial bodies round but not the Earth?"

A: The Earth is not one of the other planets. The Earth is special and unlike the other bodies in numerous ways.

Q: "What about satellites? How do they orbit the Earth?"

A: Since sustained spaceflight is not possible, satellites can't orbit the Earth. The signals we supposedly receive from them are either broadcast from towers or any number of possible pseudolites. However, temporary space-flight is possible.

Q: "What's underneath the Earth?" aka "What's on the bottom?" aka "What's on the other side?"

A: This is unknown. Some believe it to be just rocks, while others believe the Earth rests on the back of four elephants and a turtle.

Q: "What about gravity?"

A1: In the general model, DE accelerates the Earth and all celestial bodies in the universe at 9.8m/s2. This is commonly known as Universal Acceleration, which produces the same effect as "gravity" in our local reference frame. See: Equivalence Principle.

A2: In James McIntyre's model, Universal Accelerator is an object that sits underneath the Earth and pushes it up at an acceleration of 9.8m/s2. This mediates observable gravitational effects in our local reference frame.

A3: In John Davis's model, the infinite plane produces a finite gravitational field with a downward pull. Here is the mathematical formulation behind this model.

Q: "Isn't this version of gravity flawed for the moving Earth? Wouldn't planes/helicopters/paragliders crash into the Earth as the Earth rises up to them?"

A: No. By the same argument, we could ask why planes/helicopters/paragliders don't crash into the Earth as they accelerate down towards them. The reason that planes do not crash is that their wings produce lift, which, when the rate of acceleration upwards equals that of gravity's pull downwards, causes them to remain at a constant altitude.

The same thing happens if the Earth is moving up. The plane is accelerating upwards at the same rate as the Earth, which means the distance between them does not change. Therefore, the plane stays at the same height and does not crash.

Q: "Doesn't this mean we'd be traveling faster than the speed of light, which is impossible?"

A: The equations of Special Relativity prevent an object from accelerating to the speed of light. Due to this restriction, these equations prove that an object can accelerate at a constant rate forever, and never reach the speed of light. For an in depth explanation: Click here.

Q: "In the moving Earth, why does a feather fall slower than a bowling ball"?

A: It's due to air resistance. The Earth accelerates the air, and the air in turn accelerates the feather up faster than the bowling ball. In our reference frame, it seems that the feather is falling slower than the bowling ball.

Q: "If gravity does not exist, how does terminal velocity work"?

A: When the acceleration of the person is equal to the acceleration of the Earth, the person has reached terminal velocity (Diagram).

Q: "If the world was really flat, what would happen if you jump off the disc's edge?"

A1: In the general model, you would become directly affected by DE as the Earth is, creating the illusion that you are standing next to the Earth.

A2: In James McIntyre's model, if you were to come into contact with the UA, which is functionally a physical object, you would consequently rise at an accelerating rate equal to that of the Earth. The local effect would be the appearance of just standing next to the Earth. Since nobody knows what the UA looks like, this might not even be distinguishable from just standing on more ground.

Q: "If the Earth was indeed a flat disc, wouldn't the whole planet crunch up into itself and eventually transform into a ball?"

A: If the Earth generated a gravitational field, it would eventually happen. Of course, it would take a billion years for the process to complete. FE assumes that the Earth does not generate a gravitational field. What we know as 'gravity' is provided by the acceleration of the earth.

Q: "Why does gravity vary with altitude?"

A: The heavenly bodies have a slight gravitational pull. However, not all FE'ers believe that gravity varies with altitude.

Q: Follow-up to previous question: "How is it that the Earth does not have a gravitational pull, but stars and the moon do?"

A: This argument is a non-sequitur. You might as well ask, "How is it that snakes do not have legs, but dogs and cats do?" Snakes are not dogs or cats. The Earth is not a star or the moon. It doesn't follow that each must have exactly the properties of the others, and no more.



PLEASE REMEMBER I DONT REALLY AGREE WITH THIS. I JUST THINK IT IS WRONG TO IGNORE IT.

Hello dwixi, absolute brilliant OP. But I think many will have a hard time relating to the depth of it's meaning, evident by some of the posts so far. Thanks for bringing it up. Before I make further comment, I would like to explore this website,

Thanks again,
William

---------- Post added 07-26-2009 at 02:32 PM ----------

Being that I had never heard of such a 'group', I assumed it to be a website noting and putting emphasis on the diversity of perception in a metaphorical sense that would define the argument that arrises when discussing those perceptions. To me this group, after a very brief visit to this website and to wiki as DT suggested, is epitome of that argument as it goes to absurd degrees to argue to acheive attention from those are perplexed in they find very little meaning in the postulations of those "round earth believers". The flatearthsociety is set up to offer a home to these confused individuals and so attracts them. All I can say it "damn", it's sad the extremes some will go to, to attract attention.

Now for the sake of argument, let's say the earth is flat and it is our perception that is flawed and the horizon is an "optical illusion" noting it's curvature. If it is so an "optic illusion" we were meant to see it that way not hypothesize to the contrary for that at the very best, can be only deemed the absurdity of our imaginary processes inviting argument and achieving "attention". It does illustrate, however, the gulf that exists, between the real and the imaginary, providing an escape for the confused into "lala" land. I can understand it in a metaphorical sense if those discussions included the repercussions of the argument of our perceptions, which I often do, but this is carrying it to an absurd extreme to gain attention, such as also can be noted as an objective attributed to the ego. UMMHO.:perplexed:

William

PS; The blind leading the blind, can also be an appropriate analogy, I think.

dwixi - I am not saying that we should ignore them. What I am saying is that their hypothesis is so obviously false that we should not taken them seriously. So, don't ignore them, just chuckle at their silliness and, if pressed, just say 'believe whatever you like, friend, just don't expect me to take that mess seriously'. Because there is nothing serious about their hypothesis.

Well, they are not really blind assumptions. We have many people who have seen earth from space, with either cameras or their own eyes, and to believe the earth is flat would require you to first believe they all are lying, that is, an huge conspiracy existing for no good enough reason. And, if you believe in that, them you would also need to believe that all modern physics is also lying, making the conspiracy even bigger, as otherwise its easy to conclude to earth is round.

Also, anyone else noticed that in incomplete entries its written:

"This page is currently under construction. Please come back when we have our act together."

And their registration page:

Name:
Address:
E-mail Address:
Phone Number:
City: State: Zip Code:
Country:
Favorite Color:
Favorite Jellybean Flavor:
Favorite Radioactive Isotope:
Favorite Mineral:
Favorite Eastern European Nation:
Favorite Presidential Cabinet Member:

They obviously are just goofing around and dont really believe the earth is flat =)