Proof

  • 34 Replies
  • 4037 Views
Proof
« on: August 06, 2008, 08:53:52 AM »
Is  there any actual proof of a flat Earth? No equations because they aren't always right.
"Everything we believe is based on our preception of the universe around us.  We know nothing.  There is no proof, only evidence."
-Moonlit

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #1 on: August 06, 2008, 08:55:14 AM »

*

sokarul

  • 18323
  • Discount Chemist
Re: Proof
« Reply #2 on: August 06, 2008, 08:56:20 AM »
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za00.htm
You can keep posting that book and I will keep posting about how it proves nothing. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: Proof
« Reply #3 on: August 06, 2008, 08:57:52 AM »
More than a simple book too. Anyone can right ad book and be "telling the truth."
"Everything we believe is based on our preception of the universe around us.  We know nothing.  There is no proof, only evidence."
-Moonlit

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #4 on: August 06, 2008, 09:00:26 AM »
Quote
You can keep posting that book and I will keep posting about how it proves nothing.

The experiments in Earth Not a Globe prove that the earth is not a globe with a circumference of 25,000 English statute miles.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2008, 09:07:03 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: Proof
« Reply #5 on: August 06, 2008, 09:03:10 AM »
Which equations?
"Everything we believe is based on our preception of the universe around us.  We know nothing.  There is no proof, only evidence."
-Moonlit

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #6 on: August 06, 2008, 09:05:00 AM »

Re: Proof
« Reply #7 on: August 06, 2008, 09:09:32 AM »
If that equation shows the Earth is flat then why is it that we can't see for a long way away on the ground but we can when we're on a hill and even farther on a plane.
"Everything we believe is based on our preception of the universe around us.  We know nothing.  There is no proof, only evidence."
-Moonlit

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Administrator
  • 12106
Re: Proof
« Reply #8 on: August 06, 2008, 09:12:06 AM »
If that equation shows the Earth is flat then why is it that we can't see for a long way away on the ground but we can when we're on a hill and even farther on a plane.

Because even in RET that wouldn't happen. Use the search function before asking questions; they've usually already been answered.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #9 on: August 06, 2008, 09:14:40 AM »
If that equation shows the Earth is flat then why is it that we can't see for a long way away on the ground but we can when we're on a hill and even farther on a plane.

When you increase your altitude you are changing your perspective lines in relation to the earth, pushing back your vanishing point. The vanishing point, beyond which no man can see, is created when his perspective lines reach a certain angle smaller than the eye can see. If you increase your height you are changing your perspective lines and thus can see further before all sight is lost to the vanishing point.

The same effect is found on a 3D video game which assumes a flat surface. When you increase your altitude you can see farther because you are  so much higher than everything else. Your computer's resolution is better able to see something below you than off on the horizon where the pixels are linearly squished.

When you increase your altitude on a plane you have pushed your vanishing point back.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2008, 09:18:50 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

sokarul

  • 18323
  • Discount Chemist
Re: Proof
« Reply #10 on: August 06, 2008, 09:16:06 AM »
Quote
You can keep posting that book and I will keep posting about how it proves nothing.

The experiments in Earth Not a Globe prove that the earth is not a globe with a circumference of 25,000 English statute miles.
Nope
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: Proof
« Reply #11 on: August 06, 2008, 09:16:35 AM »
Well, I simply no the answer "it's due to a gas that omits from different things, which causes an elliptical illusion."
"Everything we believe is based on our preception of the universe around us.  We know nothing.  There is no proof, only evidence."
-Moonlit

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 40903
Re: Proof
« Reply #12 on: August 06, 2008, 04:27:17 PM »
Quote
You can keep posting that book and I will keep posting about how it proves nothing.

The experiments in Earth Not a Globe prove that the earth is not a globe with a circumference of 25,000 English statute miles.

It also proves that the sun is 700 miles above the earth

Quote from: http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za23.htm#page_99
Hence it is demonstrable that the distance of the sun over that part of the earth to which it is vertical is only 700 statute miles.

However, you yourself have shown that the sun is 3000 miles above the earth.  Are you saying that Rowbotham's experiment may have been flawed or was your experiment flawed?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #13 on: August 06, 2008, 08:00:47 PM »
Quote
However, you yourself have shown that the sun is 3000 miles above the earth.  Are you saying that Rowbotham's experiment may have been flawed or was your experiment flawed?

That's debatable. The 3,000 mile experiment was done at equinox when the sun is over the equator, while Rowbotham does not mention during what season he did his experiment.

It's been known for centuries that the sun is closer to the earth at certain times of the year and farther away from it at others. The sun's constantly changing altitude is seen in its analemma:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Analemma_pattern_in_the_sky.jpg

?

jdoe

  • 388
Re: Proof
« Reply #14 on: August 06, 2008, 08:06:48 PM »
Wait, the sun changes it's altitude?  Would that mean it's angular size would be changing too?
Mars or Bust

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #15 on: August 06, 2008, 08:10:21 PM »
Wait, the sun changes it's altitude?  Would that mean it's angular size would be changing too?

The sun's diameter does change between summer and winter. There are a number of studies of the sun's diameter at different seasons on Google.

?

jdoe

  • 388
Re: Proof
« Reply #16 on: August 06, 2008, 08:12:49 PM »
If the sun's altitude were changing from 700 miles to 3000 miles the change in angular size would be quite apparent.  In fact, it should change by a factor of 4.
Mars or Bust

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #17 on: August 06, 2008, 08:16:22 PM »
If the sun's altitude were changing from 700 miles to 3000 miles the change in angular size would be quite apparent.  In fact, it should change by a factor of 4.

The sun's diameter should also change radically over the course of a day when it is directly overhead compared to when it is thousands of miles away during its setting.

But the fact remains that the sun's diameter is maintained through a magnification effect of the atmosphere balancing out its shrinking due to perspective.

http://theflatearthsociety.net/forum/index.php?topic=273.msg12212#msg12212

?

jdoe

  • 388
Re: Proof
« Reply #18 on: August 06, 2008, 08:24:22 PM »
Let's assume we're looking at the sun at zenith.  The atmosphere is no different when the sun is 700 miles overhead than when it is 3000 miles overhead.  How can the atmosphere magnify the sun differently in both situations if the atmosphere remains the same?

Put it this way.  When looking at a ball through a magnifying glass, does the ball remain the same apparent size when you move it farther away?  It doesn't and so shouldn't the sun.
Mars or Bust

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 40903
Re: Proof
« Reply #19 on: August 06, 2008, 08:33:26 PM »
Quote
However, you yourself have shown that the sun is 3000 miles above the earth.  Are you saying that Rowbotham's experiment may have been flawed or was your experiment flawed?

That's debatable. The 3,000 mile experiment was done at equinox when the sun is over the equator, while Rowbotham does not mention during what season he did his experiment.

It's been known for centuries that the sun is closer to the earth at certain times of the year and farther away from it at others. The sun's constantly changing altitude is seen in its analemma:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Analemma_pattern_in_the_sky.jpg

Of course you realize that the analemma varies depending on your latitude, don't you? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analemma
http://www.analemma.com/Pages/framesPage.html

The problem with calculating the height of the FE sun is that the height changes depending on your latitude.  If you were to measure the height of the sun from different latitudes at the same time on the same day, you would get different results.  This has been demonstrated before.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=20398.0
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #20 on: August 06, 2008, 09:34:33 PM »
Quote
Put it this way.  When looking at a ball through a magnifying glass, does the ball remain the same apparent size when you move it farther away?  It doesn't and so shouldn't the sun.

Bad analogy. When you move the ball away from the magnifying glass, are you creating more medium of the glass between the observer and the ball?

Quote
The problem with calculating the height of the FE sun is that the height changes depending on your latitude.

Who has gone out and demonstrated this? All I see are hypothetical thought experiments.

?

jdoe

  • 388
Re: Proof
« Reply #21 on: August 06, 2008, 09:47:27 PM »
Quote
Put it this way.  When looking at a ball through a magnifying glass, does the ball remain the same apparent size when you move it farther away?  It doesn't and so shouldn't the sun.

Bad analogy. When you move the ball away from the magnifying glass, are you creating more medium of the glass between the observer and the ball?


What?  Just to be clear, we are looking at a ball through the center of a magnifying glass.  If we move the ball farther away in the center of the magnifying glass, it gets smaller.  The amount of glass in between doesn't change, so the magnification is the same.  It's the same thing when we look at the sun directly overhead through the atmosphere.
Mars or Bust

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #22 on: August 06, 2008, 09:56:59 PM »
Quote
What?  Just to be clear, we are looking at a ball through the center of a magnifying glass.  If we move the ball farther away in the center of the magnifying glass, it gets smaller.  The amount of glass in between doesn't change, so the magnification is the same.  It's the same thing when we look at the sun directly overhead through the atmosphere.

When the sun moves away the amount of atmosphere between the sun and observer changes.

?

jdoe

  • 388
Re: Proof
« Reply #23 on: August 06, 2008, 10:00:06 PM »
Quote
What?  Just to be clear, we are looking at a ball through the center of a magnifying glass.  If we move the ball farther away in the center of the magnifying glass, it gets smaller.  The amount of glass in between doesn't change, so the magnification is the same.  It's the same thing when we look at the sun directly overhead through the atmosphere.

When the sun moves away the amount of atmosphere between the sun and observer changes.

Ludicrous.  Amateur balloonists know that the atmosphere goes down about 1% of its sea-level density at 30km.  At 700 miles it is practically vacuum, likewise at 3000 miles.
Mars or Bust

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #24 on: August 06, 2008, 10:21:07 PM »
« Last Edit: August 06, 2008, 10:24:50 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Proof
« Reply #25 on: August 07, 2008, 02:58:21 AM »
If the sun's altitude were changing from 700 miles to 3000 miles the change in angular size would be quite apparent.  In fact, it should change by a factor of 4.

The sun's diameter should also change radically over the course of a day when it is directly overhead compared to when it is thousands of miles away during its setting.

But the fact remains that the sun's diameter is maintained through a magnification effect of the atmosphere balancing out its shrinking due to perspective.

http://theflatearthsociety.net/forum/index.php?topic=273.msg12212#msg12212

Lens-like magnification (not just linear refraction) can only occur if the boundary of the transmission medium is curved.  By the very definition of FE this is not this case.

Back to the drawing board I'm afraid, Tom.
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

?

jdoe

  • 388
Re: Proof
« Reply #26 on: August 09, 2008, 06:02:58 PM »


I'm not talking about the magnification when the sun moves across the sky.  I'm talking about the magnification that occurs when the sun changes altitude.
Mars or Bust

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #27 on: August 09, 2008, 06:04:20 PM »
Quote
I'm not talking about the magnification when the sun moves across the sky.  I'm talking about the magnification that occurs when the sun changes altitude.

When the sun changes altitude it is also changing the amount of atmosphere between the observer and sun.

?

jdoe

  • 388
Re: Proof
« Reply #28 on: August 09, 2008, 06:06:24 PM »
Quote
I'm not talking about the magnification when the sun moves across the sky.  I'm talking about the magnification that occurs when the sun changes altitude.

When the sun changes altitude it is also changing the amount of atmosphere between the observer and sun.

No, that's what I was saying before.  When the sun is 700 miles overhead or 3000 miles overhead there is same amount of atmosphere underneath.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2008, 06:29:57 PM by jdoe »
Mars or Bust

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17663
Re: Proof
« Reply #29 on: August 09, 2008, 08:11:11 PM »
Quote
No, that's what I was saying before.  When the sun is 700 miles overhead or 3000 miles overhead there is same amount of atmosphere underneath.

http://i34.tinypic.com/mj4aao.gif

Quote
Put it this way.  When looking at a ball through a magnifying glass, does the ball remain the same apparent size when you move it farther away?  It doesn't and so shouldn't the sun.

Also, I just did your magnifying glass thought experiment you mention here.

As I moved the ball away from the magnifying glass it appeared to get larger in diameter.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2008, 08:23:35 PM by Tom Bishop »