Proof the Earth is round

  • Thread starter Thread starter 311splawndude
  • Start date Start date
Here's one: if the atmosphere gradually turns into a vacuum, and the earth is spinning, why don't we see evidence of some swirling over the earth? I know clouds are much lower but they always look undisturbed. If there are particles in space, and it's not a perfect vacuum, wouldn't spinning earth create friction? Maybe it will stop spinning eventually?
 
By the way, the interstellar medium is a vacuum for all intents and purposes. A perfect vacuum is a theoretical concept.

2.jpg
 
acceptance said:
I feel like I'm talking to a serial liar when trying to get to the bottom of the globe earth debate. Every conceivable obvious question has an excuse for why even though it seems flat it's not: too far to see, too big to feel, too small to detect, mirages, refractions, gravity, and so on.
Click to expand...
See that’s what you don’t seem to grasp.
All those “excuses” are real life things. Things that have been tested and observed and still show that the earth is round. It has been tested to the nth degree and there is still zero proof of the earth being flat, and proof literally everywhere you look that it’s round.

That’s how things become facts. People have done everything imaginable to prove it wrong and they still can’t.
 
acceptance said:
Here's one: if the atmosphere gradually turns into a vacuum, and the earth is spinning, why don't we see evidence of some swirling over the earth? I know clouds are much lower but they always look undisturbed. If there are particles in space, and it's not a perfect vacuum, wouldn't spinning earth create friction? Maybe it will stop spinning eventually?
Click to expand...
It’s not a vacuum like you use to clean your carpets. It doesn’t suck anything in.
 
Dan Gleesak said:
It’s not a vacuum like you use to clean your carpets. It doesn’t suck anything in.
Click to expand...
I know. Tell me though, are you aware of a lab experiment or artificial environment where a gaseous environment can gradually turn into a vacuum?
 
acceptance said:
I feel like I'm talking to a serial liar when trying to get to the bottom of the globe earth debate. Every conceivable obvious question has an excuse for why even though it seems flat it's not: too far to see, too big to feel, too small to detect, mirages, refractions, gravity, and so on.
Click to expand...
Ding ding ding. A simple observation gets a long winded essay to explain it and the explanations are all geared around discrediting your senses. Plus they parse search results in order to control "disinfo" so pretty much it's deceit IMO.
 
VonBonfire said:
Ding ding ding. A simple observation gets a long winded essay to explain it and the explanations are all geared around discrediting your senses. Plus they parse search results in order to control "disinfo" so pretty much it's deceit IMO.
Click to expand...

That’s not really fair though. Of course the explanations will seem “geared towards discrediting your senses” if the person is only using their senses to dispute scientifically proven things. That’s why science is important, it takes away personal senses and biases and subjectivity…and finds the truth about things.
Many many things in science are not yet fact, but a lot of things are too, so it’s a pretty big deal to consider something a scientific fact or objective truth.
 
@acceptance what would it take to convince you of a globe earth. Like if we got you on a rocket up into space so you could view the earth for yourself; would that be enough to convince you?
 
Dan Gleesak said:
That’s not really fair though. Of course the explanations will seem “geared towards discrediting your senses” if the person is only using their senses to dispute scientifically proven things. That’s why science is important, it takes away personal senses and biases and subjectivity…and finds the truth about things.
Many many things in science are not yet fact, but a lot of things are too, so it’s a pretty big deal to consider something a scientific fact or objective truth.
Click to expand...
I am a person who lives simply and views the world through more simplistic methods, perhaps contributing to my lack of understanding here. I don't even have a complex guitar rig. I don't believe in those either. :LOL:

MadAsAHatter said:
@acceptance what would it take to convince you of a globe earth. Like if we got you on a rocket up into space so you could view the earth for yourself; would that be enough to convince you?
Click to expand...
The only earth pictures we've viewed are composites photoshopped by NASA into a single image. Is that because they can't get far enough away to get the photos in a single shot? That seems implausible going by their "went to the moon" "satellites a jupiter" type stuff. So why the composites? FAKE.
 
VonBonfire said:
I am a person who lives simply and views the world through more simplistic methods, perhaps contributing to my lack of understanding here. I don't even have a complex guitar rig. I don't believe in those either. :LOL:


The only earth pictures we've viewed are composites photoshopped by NASA into a single image. Is that because they can't get far enough away to get the photos in a single shot? That seems implausible going by their "went to the moon" "satellites a jupiter" type stuff. So why the composites? FAKE.
Click to expand...
But that kind of goes back to what I was saying before about your approach to it. I’m fine with people calling science a belief system. You and I have different systems and have come to different conclusions. Whereas acceptance is trying to use “my” system to disprove the system, and that to me warrants the ridicule.


Also there are plenty non composite photos of earth and space out there, they just don’t look pretty
 
Dan Gleesak said:
But that kind of goes back to what I was saying before about your approach to it. I’m fine with people calling science a belief system. You and I have different systems and have come to different conclusions. Whereas acceptance is trying to use “my” system to disprove the system, and that to me warrants the ridicule.


Also there are plenty non composite photos of earth and space out there, they just don’t look pretty
Click to expand...
I believe acceptance is asking some valid questions. No doubt if I was trying to convert you, or him, to orthodoxy there would be some serious doubts and questions involved, possibly some ridicule on both sides, lol. And truthfully, like anything with increasing layers of complexity, none of us are fully equipped to provide all the answers whether it be for globe earth or orthodoxy. For example, even my triple PHD holding priest occasionally defaults to the reader/chanter on certain matters related to the service and orthodox tradition, the reader/chanter being someone who is very into byzantine and orthodox history. I hope you and @acceptance are well today. I love having both of you guys around the forum and enjoy having gotten to know you both a little better. I even like watching you two argue sometimes, lol
 
VonBonfire said:
I believe acceptance is asking some valid questions. No doubt if I was trying to convert you, or him, to orthodoxy there would be some serious doubts and questions involved, possibly some ridicule on both sides, lol. And truthfully, like anything with increasing layers of complexity, none of us are fully equipped to provide all the answers whether it be for globe earth or orthodoxy. For example, even my triple PHD holding priest occasionally defaults to the reader/chanter on certain matters related to the service and orthodox tradition, the reader/chanter being someone who is very into byzantine and orthodox history. I hope you and @acceptance are well today. I love having both of you guys around the forum and enjoy having gotten to know you both a little better. I even like watching you two argue sometimes, lol
Click to expand...

The questions are indeed good questions. Thats how a lot of science starts. The offense is that there are people out there with questions that then dedicate their lives to answering them.
But now it’s cool for people still in the question stage to shit on them because all the work they put in to understand how the world works around us resulted in conclusions that don’t make sense to someone happy with just questioning.
 
Dan Gleesak said:
The questions are indeed good questions. Thats how a lot of science starts. The offense is that there are people out there with questions that then dedicate their lives to answering them.
But now it’s cool for people still in the question stage to shit on them because all the work they put in to understand how the world works around us resulted in conclusions that don’t make sense to someone happy with just questioning.
Click to expand...
Anytime you put something out there it is subject to everyone's opinions so it's part of the gig if you are stating absolutes then some people will probably never be satisfied with explanations. I mean, neither of you are orthodox and yet I would categorically state that it is the one true church. I would expect some people to get combative over that if I was as adamant about it as ball earth people are about it being a globe.
 
Dan Gleesak said:
The questions are indeed good questions. Thats how a lot of science starts. The offense is that there are people out there with questions that then dedicate their lives to answering them.
But now it’s cool for people still in the question stage to shit on them because all the work they put in to understand how the world works around us resulted in conclusions that don’t make sense to someone happy with just questioning.
Click to expand...
I believe strongly that everyone has a right to "own" their own mind by evaluating evidence and coming to their own conclusions. I can see how being challenged by a layman might be offensive to someone who has dedicated their lives to studying something. But on the other hand, it appears that there is enough ambiguity and/or inconsistency (Perhaps by unfortunate chance) with this issue that taking another look at it has become somewhat popular.
 
MadAsAHatter said:
@acceptance what would it take to convince you of a globe earth. Like if we got you on a rocket up into space so you could view the earth for yourself; would that be enough to convince you?
Click to expand...
A clear picture like you just posted from a source I trusted would be nice. Bedford experiment, a rocket, sure, and so on. I don't think I'm being overly skeptical. I think you guys have been so ingrained that it doesn't even occur to you that what's being claimed is absurd from the standpoint of our everyday lives.
 
Last edited:
By the way, I feel the same way about evolution. Totally ridiculous idea IMO, but we can discuss that another time.
 
VonBonfire said:
The only earth pictures we've viewed are composites photoshopped by NASA into a single image. Is that because they can't get far enough away to get the photos in a single shot? That seems implausible going by their "went to the moon" "satellites a jupiter" type stuff. So why the composites? FAKE.
Click to expand...

This is one from that isn't a composite. Probably one of the most famous ones. It was taken during the Apollo 8 mission during a live broadcast while in lunar orbit.

1727988768162.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top