Flat Earth vs Globe
Since flat earthers don't seem to understand the scientific method clearly enough to be able to set up and actually execute an experiment themselves, I will set one up for them. If what they believe is true, it should be possible to overcome atmospheric visibility affects by increasing the amount of energy put into a point source. I recommend a high powered laser, but a spotlight with an enormous amount of lumens will work as well. Pick an area that is flat and dry such as Bonneville Salt Flats or Cloncurry, Australia. Set up the transmission post and an observation post. Observe and disseminate results. Leave the apparatus in place for independent verification.
Total cost, prolly $2000. Kickstart/indigogo it if it isn't valuable enough for any single flat earther to bother with. There is no excuse. You can't prove it from your keyboard. Extraordinary claims require proof. I am calling out the flat earthers. Put up or stfu. If it isn't BS, I guarantee it will be a tourist site that will be visited in droves so you can get your lousy $2k back. No excuse.
Well, you can go onto ThouTube and watch a video of some flat earth scientists doing exactly that. They got 8 miles across water. The laser barely worked at that distance, but with the laser held down near the ankle, the receiving team saw the laser on the opposite shore.
They are trying other lighting options and larger distances.
The earth is not a ball. There is too much evidence that disproves that theory.
However, the earth is also not a flat disk. Scientists have a lot to explore.
The first evidence that the earth is in fact a ball is because we can clearly observe heavenly bodies A and B, the moon and sun respectively.
Object A is a sphere, It FLOATS IN AIR, and faces us as it spins around, while object b also a sphere, also floats and it rotates around its axis. When object A is in full moon and we are in a specific time and place there will be a lunar eclipse. In today's world you should have no problem watching the sun set on one shore and rise on the other, clearly proving curvature, hiding behind the horizon, all of this through free webcams and traffic and secuity cams, university and all kinds of streaming webcams where you can clearly observe the phenomenon of sunrise and sunset, which like lunar eclipse is not explained through any flat earth model.
Sorry, the flat earth model provides for these facts much better.
Albeit, in both (flat earth & ball earth) there is an adequate theory for how the moon and the sun work.
Speaking of the moon, have you seen the videos where the moon is seen with a scrolling refresh bar?
Like a tube television that loses its synch? It has been filmed multiple times by multiple people in multiple locations. It is just freaky!
From the earth's point of view, the moon does not spin.
And the most freaky thing about the sun are videos taken in extremely dry and cloud free areas. The sun doesn't set, it just gets small and smaller and smaller.
There is some weird stuff going on! A lot more is happening, and it is becoming a hot time for scientists to be alive.
What facts are we talking about, because it means nothing to tell me that there is an adequate theory for how the moon and the sun work. So what that there is a theory, DID I REQUEST A THEORY, HAVE I MADE SUCH A DEMAND OR IMPLIED THAT?
I remarked that by looking at the heavens, like our ancestors and like the numerous people from different cultures have observed, we can infer that we too are a sphere hanging in the air, like the sun and moon, spinning ON IT'S AXIS, just like the sun and moon. You haven't proven anything in that respect, you chose to make wild claims. What irks me is that you could care less to discuss this as you haven't addressed ANY of the numerous questions which you unleashed when you made the statement basically attacking my OBSERVATIONS. You said in no uncertain terms "Sorry, your observations of the universe using your 5 senses aren't good enough, I know better" and here I AM ASKING, YOU, the one who's sorry is a veiled dismissal of my observations, to please, CONSIDER WHAT THE FUCK COMES OUT OF YOUR MOUTH. Maybe this time you won't outright insult my observations and dismiss them without argument or evidence...
You expect an entire theory(s) to be typed in the comments?
No, all I can do is point out the theories exist, and such you can go look at them.
The moon and the sun look like discs. That is all we can say. We assume they are spheres because we have been told they are spheres. We have been told that they are spheres and that the earth is a sphere, by NASA and our science books. I do not believe what NASA and our science books say because I have seen too much evidence to the contrary.
So, if we take your statement about your 5 senses crap (you really only mean one), then the only thing that you can say is that from our perspective they look like a circle. Everything else you have said is based on assumptions. And I do not agree with those assumptions, because I have seen too much evidence to the contrary.
Lunar libration shows clearly that the moon is a sphere. This next bit is common knowledge :Galileo discovered from the movement of sunspots that the Sun rotates on its own axis, and each revolution takes about an earth month. However, because the Sun is fluid not solid, it spins faster at its equator (27 days) than at the poles (35 days).
This is observable, many have observed this, me too. You made the claim that the facts are better explained by your theory but you clearly dismissed my observations with that veiled sorry, have still not addressed ANYTHING I have said, and you conclude that YOU have seen to much evidence to the contrary.
First, please post HERE, all contrary evidence, or your claim is SHIT.
Next, please explain how you came to the conclusion that all of what I had to say was easily dismissable by saying your theory offers a better explanation, when I did just that, I offered the observations of how the sun, the earth and moon works, simplistic but still managed to take the effort to explain the basic concept, but you think it's a pretty high expectation of me to demand what the theory actually says because it's in the comments.
You have claimed that we cannot observe the celestial bodies A and B as spheres but mere CIRCLES, you sir are a laugh.
Again, this is a comment, not a post, or a series of posts.
I intend to post all evidence and theories I have. It will probably take me more than a year.
I will do this because I would like everyone to know there are alternate theories that explain everything better than what we have shoved down our throats in schools.
I will not do this for you @baah. You have already denigrated to calling me names and using profanity. And basically all I have done is say, I do not agree with you or the science books, and I suggest you look into the other theories that are out there.
Trying to argue with you in the comments thread appears pointless, as you have already gone to the point of frothing at the mouth. Be well.
So you still claim that we cannot observe that BOTH OBJECT A AND OBJECT B are spheres? I provided proof of this knowledge being common, and you claim its a FUCKING THEORY, GTFO.
You said that the flat earth theory explains the facts better.
You failed to show that.
I asked for the theory, for the context of what FACTS you are talking about and you disregarded that. In the next sentence after commenting that the flat earth theory explains it much better you invalidated that statement complety by saying that they both do adequate job. Which is it, is the flat earth better than round earth, or are both theories adequate?
I have asked you specific question, and have provided specific proof, you haven't been exact or specific in anything, unless you wish to point that in fact you did catch me insulting you, GREAT, your word is a picture of your character, as is mine, you look like shit because you spread your facts, your DISAGREEMENTS as if they are factual. I on the other hand HAVE ASKED: SO THE FUCK WHAT, nobody is fooled by your empty placating sorry, what facts, what theory, explain yourself.
All of the objects and stars we see In the sky, could be replicated In an artificial system with a dome firmament, so they could be part of a highly advanced projection. Also the Sun and Moon could be real and we are on a flat earth with a dome firmament, floating In space, possibly even attached to another planet. The flat Earth dome could also be at the bottom of an ocean on another planet. Two questions need answering to prove the globe. 1. When you zoom In with very high powered camera there Is no observable curvature, the horizon always rises to eye level, when you go up In a balloon you don't have to look down to see the horizon like you would expect. 2. We are told there Is 8 Inches of curvature per mile squared, when this Is measured you are able to see things that should be hidden by the curvature. Why I am not absolutely certain what the answers are, I'm certain we are being lied to, and NASA Is a big part of this Illusion that Is being done against us.
I looked for videos, some for 4 miles, I found none for 8 . The flaw in it is that they are standing up on the shore on both the transmitting and observing post. The additional height accounts for the discrepancy they observe. The test case they chose was marginal to begin with. It should be dry air, at night to minimize some complicating atmospheric effects. There aren't any good reasons to use such a marginal distance either. Lighthouses are very low power combined with a Fresnal lens and can be seen for 40-50 miles. No excuse. I think this should be considered conclusively debunked until and unless an experiment of this class is conducted and verified. Clearly we aren't dealing with a group of people who are well versed in science or the combined manhours spent watching and producing videos (probably in the millions) would have resulted in some proponent spending a day to conduct an experiment that can be taken seriously. It's not rocket science after all.
Sorry that the people with a small budget and only free time are not doing it for you. Please go show them how it is done.
40-50 miles equals about 1500 feet of drop along the supposed curvature. I don't know any light house that is place 1500 feet above sea level. So, if your numbers are correct, then the conclusion is we live on an earth where the radius is much larger, or its concave, or its flat or we don't know how light travels.
Dr. Zack shows flat
and
Turning Torso (190m tall) - seen from 25km - 50km shows ball https://steemit.com/flatearth/@lasseehlers/ok-i-am-back-with-the-globe-theory
Something about Zoom.
What does the flat-earth meme represent? A psyop? A demographic that is sensitive to Kolmogorov complexity? There are many other examples of this and it represents a class of phenomena that needs to be studied more closely.