Mega Thread The Flat Earth Mega thread.

[NEGAN]

What's this obsession with thinking science is at war with "the ancients" and their beliefs?

Pi was first calculated in 250bc.

If an idea works, we keep it until something more accurate comes along. Simples.

So it turns out eclipses are calculated via taking a generally accurate basic mathenatical formula Bessel published in 1820 as a starting point. This was later refined by a guy called Chaveunet in 1855. The maths was further refined throughout the 20th century to take into account the bumpiness of the moon's surface (old models worked using the moon as a smooth surface). This was further updated by the lunar orbiter which mapped the moon a decade ago.

Then taking observations and putting them through computer similations (using trillions of data points) they refine it to a pixel depth of accuracy to determine the observer's view at different points on the Earth.

The premise was predicting eclipses only can be done with an understanding of a heliocentric model.

You are changing the goal posts into another argument into something totally different.

No one said anything about science being at war with ancients.

 

[Tuco]

The premise was predicting eclipses only can be done with an understanding of a heliocentric model.

You are changing the goal posts into another argument into something totally different.

No one said anything about science being at war with ancients.

So to summarise, an explanation that works, is easily testable and observable is invalid to you because it doesn't support FE. Meanwhile FE has no explanation for eclipses whatsoever but you accept it.

You realise that in FE it's not just the Sun and moon that circle the Earth, but the entire universe. And in fact, for FE to work the entire universe would need to hang above the plate like a large flat mobile that spins.

Nonsense.

 

[NEGAN]

So to summarise, an explanation that works, is easily testable and observable is invalid to you because it doesn't support FE. Meanwhile FE has no explanation for eclipses whatsoever but you accept it.

You realise that in FE it's not just the Sun and moon that circle the Earth, but the entire universe. And in fact, for FE to work the entire universe would need to hang above the plate like a large flat mobile that spins.

Nonsense.

I don't care if fe is correct or not....

My stance has always been the heliocentric model is garbage.

You realise that in FE it's not just the Sun and moon that circle the Earth, but the entire universe. And in fact, for FE to work the entire universe would need to hang above the plate like a large flat mobile that spins.

Absolutely but I also understand the fe enthusiasts do not have access to a budget and all the bells and whistles equipment to determine if their model work nor have they had enough time to develop a model.

The hypothesis is trying to find the curve and trying to detect motion that's it.

It is also funny that you believe that the heliocentric model absolute complete..
I will say it again your heliocentric model is not....100% complete its only 4% complete ....

And the only reason it is 4% complete is because it has a theoretical fairytale in dark energy and matter holding it together.


Now please explain what mass is fully for all of us here please.

 

[Walshy_The_Goat]

Where did the theory of the Earth being flat come from? How ridiculous a conspiracy.

If the Earth was flat, what exactly is achieved by NASA/governments etc withholding this information? SMGDH.

 

[exe ex machina]

Where did the theory of the Earth being flat come from? How ridiculous a conspiracy.

If the Earth was flat, what exactly is achieved by NASA/governments etc withholding this information? SMGDH.

It was flat and geocentric for tens of thousands of years until the Jesuits decided to make it a globe and heliocentric just a few hundred years ago.

 

[Walshy_The_Goat]

It was flat and geocentric for tens of thousands of years until the Jesuits decided to make it a globe and heliocentric just a few hundred years ago.

...until NASA/USSR made their way to space and beamed back images of the Earth, all in it's spherical glory.

 

[Tuco]

I don't care if fe is correct or not....

My stance has always been the heliocentric model is garbage.



Absolutely but I also understand the fe enthusiasts do not have access to a budget and all the bells and whistles equipment to determine if their model work nor have they had enough time to develop a model.

The hypothesis is trying to find the curve and trying to detect motion that's it.

It is also funny that you believe that the heliocentric model absolute complete..
I will say it again your heliocentric model is not....100% complete its only 4% complete ....

And the only reason it is 4% complete is because it has a theoretical fairytale in dark energy and matter holding it together.


Now please explain what mass is fully for all of us here please.

Well to your first point, the heliocentric model has nothing to do with dark matter. And it is complete enough to allow Newton to accurate chart the movement of the planets in the solar system.

Dark matter is an inevitable consequence of relativity.

Copernicus: 16th century.

Newton: 18th century

Einstein: 20th century.

See how scuence builds over time.

So obviously, Copernicus didn't have a theory of relativity to assist in his explanation of the universe.

Neither has the complete picture, but its certainly coming into focus.

Garbage? Why? Because neither model is a unifying theory of everything? So you need science to have already known everything there is to know about the universe today, before you'll accept the earth isn't flat?

To your second,

You don't need a NASA budget to prove FE is wrong. Basic high school geometry disproves it.

 

[Tuco]

Now I've watched a number of FE videos as part of this discussion.

Here are some great videos dismantling FE.

Ignore the use if the term flattards. The points and examples used in these vids are compelling.

Watch "Testing Flattards - Part 1" on YouTube


Watch "Testing Flattards - Part 2" on YouTube


Watch "Testing Flattards - Part 3" on YouTube


Watch "Testing Flattards - Part 4" on YouTube


And here's a great vid debunking the nonsense of the "filmed flat horizon infra red camera videos" movement.

Watch "INFRARED HORIZON IS A FLAT CURVE?! RE: JTolan Media1" on YouTube


I'm sure you won't watch them, but hey worth a shot.

 

[exe ex machina]

...until NASA/USSR made their way to space and beamed back images of the Earth, all in it's spherical glory.

Which has been proven to be all fake.

 

[NEGAN]

Well to your first point, the heliocentric model has nothing to do with dark matter. And it is complete enough to allow Newton to accurate chart the movement of the planets in the solar system.

Dark matter is an inevitable consequence of relativity.

Copernicus: 16th century.

Newton: 18th century

Einstein: 20th century.

See how scuence builds over time.

So obviously, Copernicus didn't have a theory of relativity to assist in his explanation of the universe.

Neither has the complete picture, but its certainly coming into focus.

Garbage? Why? Because neither model is a unifying theory of everything? So you need science to have already known everything there is to know about the universe today, before you'll accept the earth isn't flat?

To your second,

You don't need a NASA budget to prove FE is wrong. Basic high school geometry disproves it.

Nit going to retort until you Explain what mass is fully please...

You don't need a NASA budget to prove FE is wrong. Basic high school geometry disproves it.

Bit rich coming from someone who got schooled on a fe thread on how to use the curve calculation.

 

[exe ex machina]

...until NASA/USSR made their way to space and beamed back images of the Earth, all in it's spherical glory.

Why do you think there's such a huge ongoing debate about the shape of the Earth? And actual growing societies dedicated to a "flat earth"? Because no one actually knows the shape. Even Tyson Degrasse says the likelihood is the Earth isn't a globe, but a pear shape. All that is a direct/indirect admittance that the ISS and moon landing are all fake.

 

[Tuco]

Nit going to retort until you Explain what mass is fully please...


Bit rich coming from someone who got schooled on a fe thread on how to use the curve calculation.

I'm not a physicist. If you are coming onto BF expecting conversations with a physicist with an intricate knowledge of the latest advances in our knowledge of what the fabric of our universe is, then you'll be waiting a long time for a response.

I can understand the basics of why FE is nonsense, though. Can you?

Yep. I made an error in a post I quickly made while riding on a bus. I acknowledged that, corrected it, and continued on with my argument which remained valid.

 

[NEGAN]

I'm not a physicist. If you are coming onto BF expecting conversations with a physicist with an intricate knowledge of the latest advances in our knowledge of what the fabric of our universe is, then you'll be waiting a long time for a response.

I can understand the basics of why FE is nonsense, though. Can you?

Yep. I made an error in a post I quickly made while riding on a bus. I acknowledged that, corrected it, and continued on with my argument which remained valid.

This is a quote from you earlier....

"Oh dear. So the heliocentric discussion is really judt circling back to your not understanding how mass amd gravity works again"


Now please explain what mass is fully for all of us here.....educate us.

 

[Tuco]

It was flat and geocentric for tens of thousands of years until the Jesuits decided to make it a globe and heliocentric just a few hundred years ago.

Hmm. Not quite true.

A) the current incarnation of homo sapiens on Earth only have a recorded history for about 10k years, so tens is unprovable.

B) The ancient Greeks knew the Earth was round as far back as the 6th century BC. The Romans also understood this and just took it as a given. Sanskrit has shown a spherical earth was also commonly believed in india around 400AD.

So basically, as soon as humans started agriculture and literacy, it only took a few millenia for the greatest minds of the ancient world to decide the FE wasn't true, and for these ideas to be popularly understood.

The only reason FE took hold was probably a result of the dark ages.

 

[Tuco]

This is a quote from you earlier....

"Oh dear. So the heliocentric discussion is really judt circling back to your not understanding how mass amd gravity works again"


Now please explain what mass is fully for all of us here.....educate us.

No one knows exactly what mass is.

What we do know is how it can be measured, how it relates to energy, and how it behaves in relation to momentum.

We actually know a lot, without understanding fundamentally why.

Science is cool, huh?

The fact that we can function in a universe without understanding what things fundamentally are is a paradox and is utterly fascinating. But the not knowing part =/= science is just "garbage".

The reason I mentioned mass at all, is that what we know of how mass works tells us that the force of gravity is drawn to the centre of mass (which on Earth means the centre of the Earth).

Theoretically in a FE that would mean gravity would be stronger in the centre of the plate and weaker on the rim. Which is nonsense, as gravity doesn't feel different wherever you are on Earth.

The heliocentric model perfectly agrees with this and explains how smaller bodies in space orbit larger bodies once caught in the gravity of their mass.

 

[NEGAN]

No one knows exactly what mass is.

What we do know is how it can be measured, how it relates to energy, and how it behaves in relation to momentum.

We actually know a lot, without understanding fundamentally why.

Science is cool, huh?

.

Lmao enough said....

E=mc2



Now please explain to us what mass is in a heliocentric model.

 

[Walshy_The_Goat]

Which has been proven to be all fake.

By who?

 

[Tuco]

Lmao enough said....

E=mc2



Now please explain to us what mass is in a heliocentric model.

Heliocentrism is simply the observation that the planets revolve around the Sun.

That's it. Mass never came into it. It was simply observed with telescopes, geometry and mathematics.

However, since you asked mass in a heliocentric model is part of the explanation of why they revolve around the sun in the first place.

Two things to note here:

1) you don't need e=mc2 to explain the orbit of planets

2) e=mc2 helps to explain the fundamental forces of why you see the orbit of planets.

Here's my question to you,

Do you have anything to offer on FE at all? Or are you just here to answer queztions with questions?

Saying "the heliocentric model is garbage" doesn't really add anything.

 

[iBeng]

The argument that the Heliocentric model is garbage hinders 100% on believing that there has been a massive, century spanning conspiracy to trick the entire population.

The rejection of the Heliocentric model is important for the Flat Earth theory, because the Sun and Moon can function how they do now on a flat plane of existence.

So really its a multi layered conspiracy: They want to you reject two things that are easily provable and observable on the fact that: "Sometimes people are dishonest."

 

[NEGAN]

Heliocentrism is simply the observation that the planets revolve around the Sun.

That's it. Mass never came into it. It was simply observed with telescopes, geometry and mathematics.

However, since you asked mass in a heliocentric model is part of the explanation of why they revolve around the sun in the first place.

Two things to note here:

1) you don't need e=mc2 to explain the orbit of planets

2) e=mc2 helps to explain the fundamental forces of why you see the orbit of planets.

Here's my question to you,

Do you have anything to offer on FE at all? Or are you just here to answer queztions with questions?

Saying "the heliocentric model is garbage" doesn't really add anything.

Mass description in heliocentric model please stop waffling.

 

[Werewolf]

Poll added. Feel free to PM me if the options are unsatisfactory (no silly suggestions!)

 

[Tuco]

Mass description in heliocentric model please stop waffling.

Why?

 

[iBeng]

Why?

Because he firmly believes if everyone believes in the Heliocentric model, which he describes as codswallop, its UNDENIABLE proof that we can all be fooled.

 

[NEGAN]

Why?

Because you need to educate me.

"Oh dear. So the heliocentric discussion is really judt circling back to your not understanding how mass amd gravity works again"

No one knows exactly what mass is.

.

Now please explain mass according to heliocentric model physics please.

 

[Tuco]

Because you need to educate me.

"Oh dear. So the heliocentric discussion is really judt circling back to your not understanding how mass amd gravity works again"



Now please explain mass according to heliocentric model physics please.

Why?