[News]

News: The Flat Earth Society is now on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, so help spread the word!

[flyingleaf]

Is this an acceptable picture of the Flat Earth model of the universe?  Anything too big?  Too small?  Should Antarctica even be there?

The Sun and Moon are both 16x their supposed size because you'd almost not be able to see them if they're only 32 miles in diameter.  Their trails are not concentric so the two can be differentiated.

It's not complete yet.  I don't like the way the sun shines, but it 's very difficult to get a small lightsource so close to ground to illuminate half of the Earth's area properly.  The earth disc has almost no thickness right now.  There are no stars, no sky-dome, and I think I'm also forgetting something important...

Oh and a 150ft wall around the perimeter is impossible to see at this scale.

[joffenz]

There is no Antarctica but there is an ice wall, so just say the snowy part is the ice wall.

I can't see the Great Wall of China

The rest looks good. Apart from the fact that the Earth's not flat, it's still good.

[Erasmus]

The Sun and Moon are both 16x their supposed size because you'd almost not be able to see them if they're only 32 miles in diameter.

But I assume you're still lighting the surface with them as though they were 32 miles in diameter?

I don't like the way the sun shines, but it 's very difficult

-- some might say, "impossible" --

to get a small lightsource so close to ground to illuminate half of the Earth's area properly.

Turns out this is pretty strong evidence against FEism.  Of course, FEers will deny any claims about the area of the Earth that is lit at any point in time.

Anyway, very cool rendering... I am most impressed :)

-Erasmus

[JesusFreak03]

It looks a little too... strechy.

I would suggest going up to the ISS and getting a good picture of the Earth to work with first. Now that I'm thinking about it... and maybe I should start a new thread, but it looks like you hav plenty already.
 
http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&q=international+space+station&btnG=Search

Man those Photoshop loving government agents have a lot of time on their hands.

How exactly do flat-earthers explain things like satellite images
(google maps for example), the massive amounts of scientific data collected by space stations and NASA operations, GPS, satellite TV, the MIR, etc?

Has it ever occurred to anyone that that the incredibly vast complex nature of this conspiracy, which you have no evidence for, makes it a statistical impossibility. At some point doesn't Occum's Razor slice open your throats and bring forth the gushing flow of truth?

[Flatearthersareretards]

I find it difficult if not impossible to believe that not one scientist in modern times has ever found scientific proof of the flat earth and then jsut spread the truth through the media. There is no way every government and media source on the planet is in on this, a conspiracy of that scale defies all logic and knowledge of the worlds political situations makes itimmpossible.

Also the 150ft ice wall, how can no one of ever seen it. I Also jsut thought of another error in your theory. Flying from Australia to South America should take days via the antarctic route, it doesn't.

Look at your flat earth map and tell me where is the south pole? you knwo the place all those antarctic travelers try and trek to. How can all those ships traveling around antarctica do it in any kind of responable time with that much distance to cover. The flat earth theory is self defeating by it's very nature. The dimensions it immposes on the world can be disproven by anyone who buys a seat on a flight that goes somewhere via the antarctic coast.

And yes there are flights that do that my friend flew to Africa from Australia via that route and sent me photos of the Antarctic coast.

[6strings]

Flatearthersareretards, I've decided that you're a government shill, spreading lies and discontent in the ranks of the beievers, and thus anything you say is invalid.  "Friends" flying from Australia to Africa through "Antarctica", psssh, your imaginary words don't fool me.

However, on the note of Occam's Razor; nice metaphore (analogy?).  There are only specific instances in which you can apply Occam's Razor, it only  comes into practice when a sufficient theory has something added to it which does not improve its predictive power.  Otherwise I could say the following:
There are two theories as to how people live:
A) We are kept alive by a complicated system of veins, nerves, organs, etc.
B) Magic
Ergo, by Occam's razor, people are kept alive by magic
Granted this isn't a great example, but I think it kinda gets the point across.

[flyingspaghettimonster]

Ok I like the rendering. Very good example of computer skills I don't have. That said, I have a few things to add.

1) There has been 1 thing that has consistently bothered me about this conspiracy. In order for it to work, you would have to get Israel And the rest of the Middle East working together. Personally I just can't see that happening. Ever.

2) The thing about Antarctica is that as well as being a great big lump of Ice, It also generates weather for most of the "southern" Hemisphere. It cant do that if you eliminate about 70% of it.

3) The orbits for the sun dont come anywhere close to representing the 24 hour daylight, either at the north or south pole.

4) As I understand it, the Earth's magnetic field is caused by currents in the Earth's Iron rich Mantle. This magnetic field causes the effects known as Aurora Borialis and Aurora Australis (the northern and southern lights) this magnetic field also causes the Van Allen belt. There is no way that this can work with a flat Earth.

5) Assuming you have lit the Earth as if the sun was 32 miles in diametre, it seems that there are places on the Earth that never get sunlight. From looking at this model, one of those places is Tasmania (in Australia), and another is the tip of south America. So why is it green?

6) The deserts. On a round Earth, the deserts lie where they do, in short, because they exist near the Equator and are closer to the sun. (if anyone requires it, I will give you the LONG explanation on this). On a flat Earth, there is no reason adequately explaining this.

7) There is still no reason WHY the sun and moon orbit where they do. Yes they still need one, and yes that still bugs me.

If the orbit for the sun is correct, why is it that I see the sun high in the sky at midday when im along way North or South? Shouldnt it follow a long path to my right or left?

9) A note on Occam's Razor: If all things are Equal, (which in this case they aren't, given the mountain of evidence against the flat Earth) which is more likely? A spherical Earth? or A massive multi-Government conspiracy which has gotten bitter enemies to work seamlessly together, to create, for no purpose, the illusion that the Earth is round when it is in fact flat?
That first bit is important.
 Which is more likely, that human beings are kept alive by a network of blood vessels and organs, especially when we have good evidence (The various methods of instituting the death penalty come to mind) or Magic?

10) Even if Sun set and Sun rise are illusions, why dont we continually see their light whereever we are on Earth?

11) Explain for me this: The Antarctic food Chain. Whales Migrate to Antarctia in the summer to feed and Calve. What do they Eat? Krill. Its basically a shrimp that lives in the cold waters of the southern ocean. What does the Krill Eat? Plankton. Most plankton are single cell plants that photosynthesise. By this model there is no sunlight down there (down being relative) So there is no photosynthesis. So what do The Krill eat? Answer: Nothing. In this model they starve. So what do the Whales eat? In this model, Nothing. They Starve. So what the hell is the Japanese whaling fleet doing down there? (in the protectected waters of a Marine park I might add). Playing Poker? Blackjack? Charades?

12) in this model the sun and the moons paths differ slightly. I'll assume this is to create eclipses. Thus the sun and the moon have different "orbital" speeds. So why does the sun never eclipse the moon?

13) Phases of the moon. We all know what they are. In this model those phases occur over the course of one night. If they are part of the conspiracy, why have they been observed since the dawn of man? Think up something creative to rebut this one.

14) The moon is only 3000 miles away. Ok then, why did it take 3 days for the Apollo Astronauts to get there? It would make no difference to the "conspiracy" if it took them 3 hours.

15) Where do the other 8 (or 9, depending on your point of view) planets fit into this model? I'm Curious.

16) Satellites. More particularly, comunications satellites. How do they orbit the Earth? And why does every big telecommunications BUSINESS spend millions of dollars each year keeping them running? on a flat Earth, they Arent necessary, so why waste the cash? And Why are there parts of Australia without mobile phone service. It would be good business for telstra to say "we serve 100% of Australians", yet they dont. Why not? given all you need is line of sight for those services, it should be easy enough.

17) Has Anyone ever asked how far backwards in Time this "conspiracy" would have to reach? Well backwards of Galilleo, Methinks. so the United states and the united nations have been executing a massive coverup since before they were ever dreamed of? Yeah, right, sure, whatever. Maybe the flat Earthers could come out with a timeline of the conspiracy?

[Erasmus]

However, on the note of Occam's Razor; nice metaphore (analogy?).  There are only specific instances in which you can apply Occam's Razor, it only  comes into practice when a sufficient theory has something added to it which does not improve its predictive power.  Otherwise I could say the following:
There are two theories as to how people live:
A) We are kept alive by a complicated system of veins, nerves, organs, etc.
B) Magic
Ergo, by Occam's razor, people are kept alive by magic
Granted this isn't a great example, but I think it kinda gets the point across.

I'm not sure that there's any point in *insisting* that Occam's Razor only be used in this way.  I could get around it by constructing a larger theory of "everything else"; i.e., a theory of, say, physics at everyday human scales that nevertheless doesn't explain how organisms stay alive.  Then I could add both your Anatomy and Magic hypotheses, realize the redundacy, and then try to determine which one to remove by seeing which leaves behind a simpler subtheory with equivalent predictive power.

In any case, I'm pretty sure I can interpret Occam's Razor so that it's useful for comparing two hypotheses, rather than only deciding whether to accept to reject an addendum to an existing theory.

-Erasmus

[flyingleaf]

I'm working on the next version, which will have a little more details, if people would agree to the validity of the following:

The current FET should use a modified "geocentric" universe in that the center of the universe is an invisible point above the North Pole, except that the Sun also has an epicycle of North-South drift, creating seasons and 24-hour days in the Arctic circle (unfortunately not so for the Antarctic, but since it doesn't exist, nobody's hurt).

Of course any geocentrism has problems, but let's not discuss it here.  This rendering is meant to be the defining picture of FET.  An accurate rendition of something flawed is obviously going to contain the flaws, and perhaps magnify them.

[Erasmus]

An accurate rendition of something flawed is obviously going to contain the flaws, and perhaps magnify them.

Which, let's admit it, is a big motivation for putting together this rendering in the first place...

[flyingspaghettimonster]

Here's something that has been bugging me about this model: Eclipses.

Look at it from the flat Earth's point of view. No matter where you are on the Earth, looking up at an eclipse, you will never actually see one. All you can Possibly see is the sun and moon side by side. The orbits of the sun and moon mean they CANNOT pass in front of each other relative to the earth, thus no eclipses.

And another thing: the flat Earthers haven't made any attempt to come up with anything to dispel my other 17 points.

[Sharky]

Hmmm... I wonder how you got to render that picture... Oh wait a minute, from the pictures we get from our satellites

[fuzzy901]

These renderings have me wondering, do FE'ers believe that the map, as accepted today (shape notwithstanding, obviously, but with 7 continents, 5 oceans, etc.) is accurate? If the globe is wrong, why not the continents on it?

[Erasmus]

These renderings have me wondering, do FE'ers believe that the map, as accepted today (shape notwithstanding, obviously, but with 7 continents, 5 oceans, etc.) is accurate? If the globe is wrong, why not the continents on it?

Because the United Nations flag shows all the continents (except the fictitious Antarctica) and oceans.  Don't ask; just thinking about the astronomical degree of stupidity required for this sort of reasoning makes me nauseous.

-Erasmus

[Flatearthersareretards]

Just a second.

*Goes to phone the research bases in Antarctica to tell them it isnt real, and proceeds to contact the families of those who have reached the south poles and tell them that they are liers.*

The south pole and Antarctica exist you stupid flat earthers, shut up and jsut accept facts ok. Jesus how can anyone be as dense as a flat earther, it's insane.

[flyingleaf]

Updated picture: note the high-lighted ice-wall on the left, epicycle for the sun, and crust thickness.  Both Sun and Moon are at about 40x their supposed size so they can be seen.

This should answer some FAQs.

[edit 1]Crap-on-a-stick, the gamma is too low (turn your screen brighter to see the details).  I'll fix it in a few days.

[Flatearthersareretards]

The light to the southern most regions of the earth is still to little, you've jsut made it more erratic.

[flyingspaghettimonster]

ok... so the sun and the moon are flat now? I'd just like to be absolutely certain of this before I attack it.

On another note, this still does not explain 24 hour daylight in Antarctica at the south pole

Also, in this flat earth model, the Magnetic South pole and does not exist. It Has to exist, as there is a Magnetic north pole. Try this: take a bar magnet and cut along the line that divides the north pole from the south pole. What you will find is that instead of creating 2 lumps of metal, one totally positive and 1 totally negative, you will have created two smaller magnets each with a north and south pole.

Given the thickness of this model, we obviously have no molten core of iron in the earth. Fine, Then the Earth has no magnetic field. In this case, there are no southern or northern lights. Or compasses. And in the Absence of A magnetic field, we all cooked about 4.5 billion years ago due to the stellar radiation produced by the sun.

I'm still mystified as to why the sun and the moon orbit as they do. Gravity isn't a toy people. You cant just play around with it till it suits, you actually have to give a reason. If you had been paying attention in science classes you'd know this.

So about this big conspiracy. When Captain Cook went on his 1st voyage to observe the transit of venus, he was in on this conspiracy as well? It sounds to me like that a conspiracy this large would have to have every single person on Earth in on it for it to work, including flat Earther's.

And the fact remains that every modification of this theory has been holier than the popes swiss cheese.

[Flatearthersareretards]

The fact is anyone with a telescope and a calculator can disprove the flat earth theory. Anyone with a telescope a calculator and a mild understanding of phsycis and astronomy aan blow it out of the water.

[flyingleaf]

The light to the southern most regions of the earth is still to little, you've jsut made it more erratic.

Elaborate, please.  The sun should only light ~1/2 of the earth's area at any given moment, and most of that lit area is lit at severe angles.  The shape of the lit area isn't quite correct, I have to admit.  That's sort of due to limitations on light placements in my rendering software.

so the sun and the moon are flat now?

Well, if the earth is flat, why should any other celestial body be spherical?  I seem to remember somewhere claiming they could be flat.

this still does not explain 24 hour daylight in Antarctica at the south pole

No it doesn't.  But the number of people who has seen this phenomenum and could testify to this is probably less than the amount of people in the Flat Earth Society.  Who's to say who is wrong?

Also, in this flat earth model, the Magnetic South pole and does not exist. It Has to exist, as there is a Magnetic north pole.

Exactly.  But if Magnetic North Pole is near the center of this disc, then it effectively makes the entire edge the Magnetic South Pole.  It's the same effect as if you're near the Mag. N. pole: anywhere away from it is "South".  The electromagnetic field will work just fine to produce Aurora Borealis (but not Aurora Australis, but even astronomers say the southern lights are rarely seen).

When some one who knows FET by heart tells me why the sun and moon orbits like that, I'll put it in the picture.