wouldntulove2loveme said:

I couldn't believe that there are really people out there in 2015 that still buy into this and the I googled it and: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/cms/

Of course the Flat Earth Society came up on Google. They're a controlled opposition. They mix satire with just a little bit of truth but enough satire to make the true flat earther's look no credible and then people move right on because now they can say I looked it up and none of it made any sense. Don't trust the Flat Earth Society.

Funkcreep said:

lust said:

Funkcreep said:

Measuring with sextants and calculating with plane trigonometry both the Sun and Moon figure to be only about 32 miles in diameter and approximately 3,000 miles away.

So is the moon a source of light or does it's light merely come from reflected sunlight? [Edited 8/14/15 19:38pm]

The moon is clearly self-luminescent, shining it's own unique light. The moons light is cold, the suns light is hot. On a clear nigh, during a waxing or waning cycle, it is even possible to occasionally see stars and planets directly through the surface of the Moon!

lust said:

Funkcreep said:

Lust: How does it have the energy to burn bright for the last 6000 years?

Me: That's a great question...i'm still researching that one. Amazing, creation by God this whole world is.

Great. Let us know what you find out but bear in mind that if your model requires supernatural special pleading to make it work then you're a long way behind a more conventional understanding of cosmic dynamics. Ockhams Razor my friend

Sounds good Lust. I'll let you know when I find out. I only found out about the flat earth a short time ago, and after investigating the evidence, it's becoming overwhelming in favor of a flat earth.

When I find out how the sun continues to shine after all those years, I'll let you know.

It would be nice if you would take the time to adress some of my arguements:

For example: The lighthouse examples...please give it a shot...give it your best shot!

Funkcreep said:

lust said:

Funkcreep said:

The moon is clearly self-luminescent, shining it's own unique light. The moons light is cold, the suns light is hot. On a clear nigh, during a waxing or waning cycle, it is even possible to occasionally see stars and planets directly through the surface of the Moon!

If the moon is a source of light, what causes the waxing and waning of it's light?

It's your turn: Again..i'll ask:

It would be nice if you would take the time to adress some of my arguements:

For example: The lighthouse examples...please give it a shot...give it your best shot!

lust said:

I spend a lot of time on the water in Auckland. Before I knew the topography when I first arrived I took a boat trip across the firth of Thames. In the distance were two islands. As I got closer I could see more little islands between the two then as I got even closer it was ear that I wasn't looking at a number of islands at all by time solid land mass. The coromandel peninsula with many peaks but even at its lowest it was quite high. The reason I only saw the peaks thinking they were islands is absolute proof for the curvature of the earth. The fact that I can't see Everest from the top of the burj Khalifa in Dubai with a strong telescope is also proof of the Curvature of the earth. I'm personally satisfied with the global Earth heliocentric solar system. Get a passport. Take a boat, a plane. Have a look around you. Don't waste your one short time existing on someone else's delusion.

I'm looking for the word lighthouse in your response that was supposed to be about lighthouses....do you wanna give it another shot? Lighthouse

ThisOne said:

I'm open minded to many theory's ideas beliefs..... And I think and consider the facts and also follow my gut instincts So as far as I'm concerned - sorry i do not agree with your concept; the earth as proven 4 hundreds of years is in fact round --------> O

ThisOne...thats fine...I appreciate your cordial response. Thanks for looking at the evidence.

Funkcreep said:

lust said:

Funkcreep said:

I'm looking for the word lighthouse in your response that was supposed to be about lighthouses....do you wanna give it another shot? Lighthouse

You've just copied and pasted flat earther claims and the maths associated with it that you don't even understand. You're just accepting those figures as true. How do we know they are true? Where's the evidence. What height was the observer in each case? I see no mention of that in the figures which is a huge red flag as its massively relevant to the distance of the horizon and therefore a crucial part of the equation. I've seen evidence of the curvature. I've not seen a lighthouse at 100 miles away despite all my time at sea so it's just unsupported claims. Doesn't warrant explaining until it's been established.

I used 42 miles...not 100 miles. You didn't address that the Isle of Wight lighhouse in England is 180 feet high and can be seen up to 42 miles away, a distance at which modern astronomers say the light should fall 996 feet below the line of sight. You didn't address it because you had no rebuttal to it, so you use a rabbit trail and change the topic and use anectdotal evidence to show how it's not true. lol

Deal with it! for sake of argument, deal with it! And we haven't even go to being able to see Mount McKinley from Anchorage, Alaska. That one is 130 miles away. But let me guess, you'll just dispute the validity of the picture, then you'll use anectdotal evidence to prove it can't be true, because you've never been to Alaska, so we can't use that proof for no curvature either. Love you reasoning, you can get out of any proof of a flat earth using your logic.

Hey Lust,

Answer this one:

From Genoa, on bright clear days, the island of Elba can be seen an incredible 125 miles away! If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, Elba should be forever invisible behind 8770 feet of curvature.

Oh i forgot, you or I haven't been there so we can't use this evidence either..damn!

Of will you use the "how do we know...." arguement? Or maybe we can't use this evidence for a flat earth because we don't know who took the picture???

From Anchorage, Alaska at an elevation of 102 feet, on clear days Mount McKinley can be seen with the naked eye from 130 miles away. If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, Mount McKinley’s 20,320 foot summit should be leaning back away from the observer and almost half covered by 9,220 feet of curved Earth. In reality, however, the entire mountain can be quite easily seen standing straight from base to summit.

JustErin said:

Funkcreep said:

this shot is close to a 100 miles away. Makes you wonder how the weatherman would explain this one without using the mirage excuse.

Those are called clouds.

From Anchorage, Alaska at an elevation of 102 feet, on clear days Mount McKinley can be seen with the naked eye from 130 miles away. If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, Mount McKinley’s 20,320 foot summit should be leaning back away from the observer and almost half covered by 9,220 feet of curved Earth. In reality, however, the entire mountain can be quite easily seen standing straight from base to summit.

Funkcreep said:

lust said:

Funkcreep said:

Hey Lust,

Answer this one:

From Genoa, on bright clear days, the island of Elba can be seen an incredible 125 miles away! If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, Elba should be forever invisible behind 8770 feet of curvature.

Oh i forgot, you or I haven't been there so we can't use this evidence either..damn!

Of will you use the "how do we know...." arguement? Or maybe we can't use this evidence for a flat earth because we don't know who took the picture???

Show me a photo of the edge of the earth then we'll talk. All those boats. All Those flat earthers yet no one has had the desire to go and prove it. Go out and see the world. Expand your horizons so to speak. Because until then you'll just continue to embarrass yourself by being a gullible sheep And celebrating your own stupidity. Sorry. I know that might seem harsh but it's totally deserved. You really are the dumbest person I've ever come across on this site and that's really impressive. "The sun is 30miles across" [Edited 8/14/15 21:51pm]

Hey that was great the way you totally addressed the pictures i sent. Nobody can ever accuse you of not dealing with the topic head on! Good job Lust

Funkcreep said:

lust said:

Funkcreep said:

Hey that was great the way you totally addressed the pictures i sent. Nobody can ever accuse you of not dealing with the topic head on! Good job Lust

Right so you just post "evidence" from flat earther sites with no vetting or time spent verifying the claims but I'm supposed To take the time to go and debunk them? I neither have the time nor the inclination as its clearly horseshit to begin with. Why can't I see Everest from the worlds tallest building? Your model predicts that you could and you can't so your model is flawed. End of story. I'm hard pressed to think of anything more arrogant than what your asserting. I will admit that I was wrong in one respect. I encouraged you to get a passport and travel. Please ignore that. Please stay put. [Edited 8/14/15 22:22pm]

"Why can't I see Everest from the worlds tallest building?" I already answered that..were you not paying attention?

Funkcreep said:

lust said:

Funkcreep said:

"Why can't I see Everest from the worlds tallest building?" I already answered that..were you not paying attention?

In all honesty, probably not. What do you make of the Bedford Tests that actually have results showing the earth is concave? Does that mean that it's evidence for a hollow earth or That the actual methology of the test that you are citing as evidence is flawed and therefore to be discounted?

I've never heard of the Bedford Tests....please send me information so i may investigate.

lust said:

Let's go back to the why? Why the cover up. We'll ignore the absurdity of the amount of cost and manpower over the centuries at creating the round earth myth. We'll ignore the impossibility of no whistle blowers over the centuries. Let's suppose it's true. Why? All I can tease out of your answers is that it's a desire to make us think there's no god? Is that right? Most of the world believes in God and a global earth so why the continued subterfuge? Is it a long term atheistic plan at eroding religious belief? Does therefore a flat earth prove God? Or am I on the wrong tack re the motive?

You use the word "why" several times. I'm going to use it for you: Why don't you have an answer to this picture? If the earth had curvature, WHY is this picture showing Mount McKinley if it's 130 miles away? WHY?

Lust, be sure to send me the info on the Bedford Tests and Lust, please don't ignore Mount McKinley.

Funkcreep said:

Funkcreep said:

lust said:

Funkcreep said:

You use the word "why" several times. I'm going to use it for you: Why don't you have an answer to this picture? If the earth had curvature, WHY is this picture showing Mount McKinley if it's 130 miles away? WHY?

Why do nasa photos and video footage show a global earth?

Thats how you explain the Mount McKinely photo?? By running and hiding behind NASA? I'm disappointed in you. You usually have some smart ass answer, or attack me. This is the first time you just run and hid behind NASA.

How about this...without using the acronym NASA...explain the Mount McKinley photo. Come one, you can do it, the Lust of old would have no problem explaining it.

lust said:

Funkcreep said:

I've never heard of the Bedford Tests....please send me information so i may investigate.

It's the main argument for a flat earth. You've unknowingly cited it repeatedly yourself. Yet you've not heard of them. This tells me everything. It's actual name is the Bedord Levels Experiment but a committed flat earther who's done his due diligence would know instantly what I meant and the names of all the relevant participants.

Again, for the second time. Lust, would you please send me information on the Bedord Levels Experiment, the more information the better. Earlier you called it the Bedford. Either way, send me a good link, I would love to check it out.

Funkcreep said: