- Joined
- Mar 30, 2010
- Messages
- 15,699
- Reaction score
- 21,857
Thanks...I keep telling gf that mine are neither sick nor disgusting. lolSolar, I know it's disgusting but some people are just into big balls, it's a sickness.
Oh the irony. :) If not for that darn pesky observational evidence...ball Earth theory could finally move beyond sci-fi and into accepted fact. Well that and gravitational theory lunacy.The bottom line is that when one compares flat versus round theories of the planet, the proposal that the Earth is round does not need to be constantly propped and patched up with every new observation.
How socialism is like the Flat Earth Theory
By Robert Arvay
Arguments for the Flat Earth Theory and socialist doctrine share many aspects in common. At first glance, to a casual observer, the Earth really does seem flat, and for most practical purposes, that observation is sufficient to guide our activities locally. Only when one travels far enough to change time zones, or to experience a change in the duration of daylight, does the flatness theory begin to seriously break down on the local level.
Most of us live in a family where socialist, even communist principles seem to prevail. In my family, we all produce according to our ability, and we each receive according to our need, at least within our means. Who knew that Karl Marx got it so right? Why can't the same principle apply just as well to society at large? Why can't we travel 12,000 miles east or west and not notice that we have to reset our clocks between A.M. and P.M.?
A more than cursory glance at websites promoting the Flat Earth Theory provides an amazing insight into how strongly a false idea can seem to be supported by fact. Its proponents can explain everything about the issues raised above, such as time differences, and even why the Earth looks round from space — everything, that is, if you take their arguments piecemeal, one at a time. It's like a game of whack-a-mole, where as soon as you defeat one item of contention, another one pops up. Yes, the Earth may look round from space, but then, what about this? What about that?
The bottom line is that when one compares flat versus round theories of the planet, the proposal that the Earth is round does not need to be constantly propped and patched up with every new observation. Occam's Razor, the principle of using the simplest available explanation that is consistent with all the observations, applies.
Likewise, the principle of "freedom with personal responsibility" suffices to form the basis of a successful society, successful in economics, in government, and in morality. Taken as a coherent whole, the idea does not need to be continually revised in response to every "yeah, but what about" argument that the whack-a-mole socialists present.
Socialist arguments seem persuasive to so many people, only because nearly every flaw in our society can be traced, ironically, to the fact that we have become far more of a socialist nation than a free one. Every freedom we lose causes further social problems, but the popularized blame goes not to lack of freedom, but to lack of socialism, the source of the problem. Medical practice in past centuries included the treatment of anemia, a blood deficiency, by draining even more blood from the weakened patient, prolonging the ailment, and often leading to death. Likewise for socialism.
To be sure, there is no purely economic policy that can heal our nation from its present, and accelerating, decline. Even if socialism really did make everyone wealthier and more economically equal, even then, without the component of personal morality, the bloodletting would be fatal. Adherence to moral principles is at least as vital to preserving and advancing our nation as any economic policy.
The abandonment of those moral principles has sown chaos. There are now so many implementations of immoral practices, legally enforced, that once again, the whack-a-mole effect has made itself visible. For example, the myth that men and women are equivalent to each other has been shown to be ludicrous by the implementation of so-called transgender policies. It cannot be had both ways. Somewhere a comic has said that yes, women can do anything that men can do, so long as those women are men. That has become the leftist answer to the iconic and ridiculous question, "Why can't a woman be more like a man?"
While there is room for sincere debate about specific details regarding morality, there is no sustainable argument against the general concept — that the best social basis of society is the family, comprising one man, one woman, joined for life, and their children. Tolerance at the fringes for variations might not threaten the society, but we have gone so far beyond that, that we have now become a zoo of outright freakish expressions of sexual perversions, each of them praised and celebrated by the social left as a basic human right, which all of us are obligated to support, under threat of losing our livelihoods, and regardless of our own moral principles.
The left has plenty of persuasive arguments to oppose the position presented here. Indeed, leftists' arguments are almost as persuasive as those of the Flat Earthers.
.![]()
How socialism is like the Flat Earth Theory
Arguments for the Flat Earth Theory and socialist doctrine share many aspects in common. At first glance, to a casual observer, the Earth really does seem flat, and for most practical purposes, that observation is sufficient to guide our a...www.americanthinker.com
.
Flat Earth Busted
Thursday, January 10, 2019
Essential Elements of the Globe Model
I created this to establish a baseline of the Globe/Heliocentric model for discussions.
When Flat Earthers make assertions that disagree with this model they are being dishonest.
- Earth is roughly an oblate spheroid described in the WGS-84 Reference Model having:
ellipsoidal flattening (f) = 1/298.257223560
equatorial radius (a) = 6378137 m
polar radius (b) = a - a f- Earth distance from the Sun varies from
147095000 km at Perihelion and
152100000 km at Aphelion- Earth mass is 5.97237×10²⁴ kg giving a surface acceleration of 9.807 m/s²
- Earth rotates once per 23h 56m 4.100s (sidereal day, 23.934472 hr)
Over a year, the average solar noon-to-noon time is 24h (synodic day)- Earth obits the Sun every 365.25635535 days, and makes 365.25635535 (+1) sidereal rotations
- Moon radius is approximately 1740 km and the distance from Earth varies from 356,500 km at perigee and 406,700 km at apogee
- Sun radius is 696,342 km (±65 km) with a mass of 1.9885×10³⁰ kg (330,000x Earth)
- Earth's Obliquity (axial tilt relative to the ecliptic, or orbital, plane) varies slightly over time, as of 2019-01-01 it is ~23.4368°
- Since Gravity is proportional to mass and is a mutual attraction of ALL mass it does not "emanate" from the center of anything but rather we can treat rigid objects as a single mass in the simple case.
From this principle, "down" *MEANS* closer to the center of the Earth.
Someone on the other side of the Earth is not "upside down".
Level is an equipotential of gravity.- Refraction exists, and is pretty well understood, but accurately measuring the atmosphere over tens or hundreds of miles is not feasible. Under common field conditions, for shorter distances you can approximate the effect of refraction by assuming an Earth Radius of 15% larger than normal. This is a very simplistic assumption but is a good approximate when nothing else can be known.
The problem for most long-range optical observations is that refraction can create a duct through which you can see substantial distances right over land or (more commonly) water. I'm sorry but this is just a FACT. The good news is that such views are usually highly distorted so we can identify when this is happening. However, the more common failure is harder to detect and that is cases of substantial looming which can cause distant objects to appear somewhat higher than normal. The setting sun is very commonly raised by about 34 arc minutes [see usno.navy.mil], meaning the sun has actually fully set when you see the lower limb reach your horizon. Flat Earthers need to either scientifically PROVE that this is false or stop lying about it. An easy way to observe this effect is to use a equatorial tracking mount with reasonably high-power optics (and a proper solar filter) follows the sun from about 2 hours before sunset. The tracking will be very accurate at first (and all day) and it will get slightly ahead of the Sun near sunset as the refraction increases and raises the Sun's apparent position. Measuring this shift is one way to measure the Refraction along that line-of-sight.
The best way to avoid the worst variations of Refraction is to get up higher.
Walter Bislin's Refraction Simulation
You don't win an argument when you create a strawman of the Model -- you LIE.
You can get the current axial tilt from timeanddate.com
And in "meme" form for sharing (minus the big Refraction Discussion)
![]()
![]()
Essential Elements of the Globe Model
I created this to establish a baseline of the Globe/Heliocentric model for discussions. When Flat Earthers make assertions that disagree ...flatearthbusted.blogspot.com
Which is not how science works. What you're implying here is that this government data is "settled science". There is no such thing as "settled science" ...there is only science and pseudoscience.When Flat Earthers make assertions that disagree with this model they are being dishonest.
Are you 100% certain *THAT* is how you wish to define the word "gravity"? Doing so means you're adopting a provably wrong theory that was completely debunked by Albert Einstein in 1913. It was also debunked shortly after Newton's death in 1727 when it was observed that Newtonian gravity could not predict the motion of the planet Mercury.Gravity is proportional to mass and is a mutual attraction of ALL mass it does not "emanate" from the center of anything but rather we can treat rigid objects as a single mass in the simple case.
Which is not how science works. What you're implying here is that this government data is "settled science". There is no such thing as "settled science" ...there is only science and pseudoscience.
Here are 7 laser tests proving conclusively that the WGS 84 model is completely wrong.
WHAT IF the Earth was Actually Flat?
I've never claimed the Earth is flat. What a load of crap! All you do is post stuff that you say proves the Earth's surface has no curvature, but when called on it, you try to say, "I never said that!" .....and you wonder why I call you dishonest? You posted a pic of Chicago and said, "look...www.goldismoney2.com
Actual science disproves the WGS 84 model. This happens on a daily basis when humans on Earth observe objects at distances too great to be consistent with the surface of a spheroid 7917 miles in diameter.
Are you 100% certain *THAT* is how you wish to define the word "gravity"? Doing so means you're adopting a provably wrong theory that was completely debunked by Albert Einstein in 1913. It was also debunked shortly after Newton's death in 1727 when it was observed that Newtonian gravity could not predict the motion of the planet Mercury.
If that is so, then tell me please at what speed your attractive "force" called gravity propagates.
You're welcome to go right on believing all the government propaganda you wish, just don't tell me it's science.
I think that's a common perspective. I think also, for many, it's merely an excuse to not challenge existing belief structures. If everything people think they know about the cosmology of our sol-ar system...and indeed the shape of Earth itself is a huge lie, then it will change people's perspectives dramatically imo.I have more pressing concerns than to spend time arguing about something like this with anyone!
I think that's a common perspective. I think also, for many, it's merely an excuse to not challenge existing belief structures. If everything people think they know about the cosmology of our sol-ar system...and indeed the shape of Earth itself is a huge lie, then it will change people's perspectives dramatically imo.
Humans do not question what they think they know.
Actual science disproves the WGS 84 model. This happens on a daily basis when humans on Earth observe objects at distances too great to be consistent with the surface of a spheroid 7917 miles in diameter.
I let the people with the big brains figure out these epic theories. Me, I don't care what the Earth is shaped like. I have more pressing concerns than to spend time arguing about something like this with anyone!
I for one would like to get out of this physical prison (meat suit and phsical world) some day...
Which is precisely what land surveyors have been saying forever. Most buildings do not have a large enough footprint to matter much in terms of Earth's alleged curvature as 8" per mile^2 simply doesn't mean much over a few hundred feet.Each zone is a flat model plane.
I stand corrected sir!I like your posts shootist, but you come in here every other page and say the same damn thing and are answered each time on why this topic is important. Human origins, afterlife, consciousness, hiding the mental universe, etc. This topic is foundational for REALLY waking up...im not talking uniparty country bullshit. Stuff that really matters. Everything else is worldy bullshit noise. I for one would like to get out of this physical prison (meat suit and phsical world) some day...
I stand corrected sir!
YUP and a couple of other things come to mind, that we just accept because we were too young to question.Nobody knows Dave, how could they? Most think they know the shape of Earth, but really they just choose to believe what they've been told without question.
Ball Earth theory has numerous explanations of the shape of Earth as well. Neil Tyson says Earth is a chubby little pear. lol
Yeppers, and Snopes is based on facts! Trvth!YUP and a couple of other things come to mind, that we just accept because we were too young to question.
You're more of a lead foot driving home? If Earth were a spheroid, your millage going South from Orygun would be worse than going home...as it'd be uphill. ...the way the Mississippi river allegedly flows.
Fortunately, most don't spend any time thinking about this stuff...because they "know" all about the shape of Earth. Nobody's going to tell them otherwise.
Why would traveling "South" be down hill when the direction of travel is toward the greater diameter of the alleged globe? Travel toward the equator would always be "up hill" on the exterior surface of a spheroid...local land features aside of course. Orygun to San Diego should be a near due South trip, depending on where in Oregon you're starting out. That being the case it's an uphill trip in the Northern hemisphere on the globe model.Travelling between central Orygun & San Diego, I have noticed a difference in my gas mileage.
I have been doing this for 28
years, which pretty much takes care of variations of speed & other factors, in ether direction.
My overall MPG going south to San Diego is 18.7 MPG. My average coming home is 17.4 MPG.
I believe that I have figured out why this is, can you ?![]()