Flat Earth

[Humanfit]

Indeed. Fascinating.

[Craig Murray]

One step closer to the truth is always worth admitting your wrong. Let's hear some more of your reasons for spherical thinking?

Do I really need more? I became convinced by solar observation. I tried very hard to understand f.e. model and imagine what I would observe in that world. It just didn't match.

Then my wife and I sat down with a couple golfballs and tried to understand the phases of the moon on a round earth. At first I was like "wtf this is bullshit" but then it sort of became clear how it works, and I can now understand why the moon is shadowed the way it is, all month long. That helped a lot.

It just explains things the best of any model I've heard. All the things.

Is NASA lying about the moon? Of course. But does that mean every telescope image you've ever seen is fake? No.

Do I believe NASA has probes that go out to those planets and a rover on Mars? I'm very skeptical... especially about the rover on mars.

But telescopes are real, and if you get a big enough one you can see the other planets. They are round too. And they have observable orbits around the sun.

That's one of the things that the heliocentric model helps us understand, why the planets appear where they appear.

You want to know my reasons for spherical thinking? Buy a book on Astronomy.

[Humanfit]

Do I really need more?

It doesn't sound like you do. You made that pretty clear. I however do. I would love to hear your experiments and results.

[Craig Murray]

If you study the way planets were tracked by astronomers before heliocentric, it was very hard for them. They just didn't understand why a planet would move slowly across the sky and then suddenly switch directions. They called them "wandering stars" and it just didnt make sense, even on a round earth.

But then they put the sun in the center and said "all the planets orbit the sun" and suddenly you could say "ok so if the earth is here in it's orbit, and jupiter is there, then i should see jupiter if I look right .." and there it is, right where it should be, based on heliocentric.

You can easily predict the positions of the planets in a heliocentric model and it all makes intuitive sense. It explains all the things. So it's most likely correct. It's the best model we have.

[Craig Murray]

It doesn't sound like you do. You made that pretty clear. I however do. I would love to hear your experiments and results.

My experiments? The only round earth experiments i've done are thought experiments and basic personal observation. I've told you most of them. Shrug.

It's the model that explains things far better than any other model. I don't need to run more experiments, I'm good. On to the next thing.

[Humanfit]

Sorry, same integrity that lets me admit I'm wrong keeps me from saying I agree if I'm not sure.

[Craig Murray]

Sorry, same integrity that lets me admit I'm wrong keeps me from saying I agree if I'm not sure.

Being not sure is a very healthy place to be. "I don't know" is something we should all say more often.

[Jason Mallory]

Ok… I just did the math from Chicago to Warren Dunes State Park in Michigan across the lake. Everyone can do this for themselves. The distance between the two is 52 miles. If you use the earth curvature calculator at https://dizzib.github.io and put the eye height at 6 feet with the distance at 52 miles then the target hidden height would be 1,601 feet. This means if the earth were a ball then anything below 1,601 feet would be hidden below the curve of the earth.


The Willis Tower in Chicago is 1,450 feet tall. It isn’t on the shore line so lets say its apparent height relative to the shore is 1,500 feet. If the earth were convexly curved then the top of the Willis Tower would be 101 feet below the curve at a distance of 52 miles from Warren Dunes State Park in Michigan. The Willis Tower in Chicago, as well as the entire skyline, is indeed visible from Warren Dunes State Park proving that the earth is not convexly curved at 8 inches per mile squared.

<span style="font-kerning: none">

[Jason Mallory]

Calculator here:

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve...&unit=imperial

[Craig Murray]

Jason you forgot to include the height of the park above lake level... in your haste to be right, you didn't think of that.

From google. "Warren Dunes State Park. Warren Dunes has three miles of shoreline, six miles of hiking trails and is open year-round. It also has a dune formation that rises 260 feet above the lake with spectacular views and 1,952 acres of recreational opportunity."

So you are not 6' in elevation, you are 266' of elevation.. now let's calculate.

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve...&unit=imperial