The Earth is Not a Globe!?! Is God literal, water above and below the firmament?

[Kitkat]

Explain how earth's magnetic field works on a flat earth. Also explain how stars rotate in opposite directions depending on if you're observing from the north or south hemisphere.

Here is what the flat earthers have to say:

While it's true that unipolar magnets can't exist, this isn't a problem for the Flat Earth. This is because ring magnets, which are shaped like (you guessed it!) a flat disk, are capable of having radial magnetization. In a radial magnet, one magnetic pole is at the center and other other is at all points on the edge of the magnet. A magnet like this can be found in loudspeakers, and perfectly replicates what is found on the Earth.

[cayenne]

This is cool. I am learning about geodetic surveying vs normal surveying. If you read the link below, and then follow the links at the bottom, there are some pretty educated people who believe the earth is flat.


http://tabooconspiracy.com/blog/flat-ea ... curvature/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Kitkat]

Flat or hollow or globe? Share your proof.
Lots of videos to watch, this one puts it into some real perspective for a flat earth.

Was God was being serious and literal, even child like simple? Water above the firmament, and below... Space isn't space, it is water.

It makes sense.

Kitkat, are you homeschooling your children? If you are, you need to make sure they get some normal educational material and not just the far out religious stuff. I taught at a private LDS school and taught many homeschooled children, so I know that sometimes homeschooling parents can go way overboard in one direction of what they want to teach and refuse to offer a well rounded education. To me, these parents do a disservice, just as much as the negatives found in public education because they give limited information which does not prepare their children for understanding the world around them and it's meant to indoctrinate, which fosters closed mindedness.

The earth is a globe and as per your request, I will share my own particular experience as to why I know this. I suspect that you might appreciate how I know this ;) .

I saw a UFO many years ago on my way down to St. George late at night. I saw the UFO slowly descend in a straight line, it's lights blinking. It stopped in mid air, then, the lights blinked and I saw it shoot away from me, and as it did, I saw the curvature of the earth--this was a split second. It was an incredible experience. At the time I realized that no aircraft that I knew of could move at that speed or in such a way. It was like I'd seen it on an episode of star trek--like the aircraft had suddenly gone into warp drive (if you're familiar with Star Trek). So, while I've never been to space, I can attest that I have first hand knowledge that the earth is round.

Yes, I do homeschool my children. I also have a degree in education and I taught in a public school system for 3 years before having a family. In addition I run a local homeschool co-op group with several families in the Provo area. I am not sure why you are worried about me not offering my children a well rounded education. I teach my children they do not need to fear the truth and no question is a stupid one. My children study mathematics, grammar, writing, history, biology, graphic design, chemistry, video game development, computer programming, keyboarding, photography, pottery, piano, classic and contemporary literature, painting, business, we meet all core standards. We have watched literally hundreds of documentaries put out from a wide variety of sources. We enjoy stuff put out by PBS, NOVA, BBC, NASA, and random youtubers. I am always open to a new idea. My son is fascinated by Nikola Tesla and has been asking about how we could invent free energy. This is one of the reasons I stumbled onto the flat earth theory.



:ymhug:

Cool story about the UFO's. How curved did the surface of the earth appear?

[braingrunt]

...
I am curious what you think of this article

http://www.14lds.com/flat.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...

I believe the point of the article was to convince the reader that Christians, (particularly evangelical Christians) have a problem with either 1) being forced to accept flat earth or 2) being forced to acknowledge their somewhat arbitrary divide of literal vs figurative interpretations of the Bible. While also pointing out that Mormons on the other hand have some relatively comfortable escapes from the dilemma.

I somewhat agree but I don't love the article for several reasons.

[cayenne]

Kitkat you are awesome We homeschool too, and love it!

[cayenne]

I want to post this again, please watch it, plus it funny how he gets the words to repeat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6PS_bgfBRU&t=64s" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

been to the moon? Been through the van allen belts? Been out of low earth orbit? Well have a listen, someone is not good at lying.

[braingrunt]

My sense seems to tell me that if we account for the sun and moon rising and setting only via perspective, then they should
1) diminish to a dot as they approach the horizon, I mean VERY small
2) their perceived approach to the horizon should slow as they get farther and farther away from us (less convinced on this one)

while rotational rising and setting will always cover the same degree of arc in the same amount of time. I believe, based on my limited experience, that rotational rising and setting are correct.

[JohnnyL]

I had asked about the curvature above in my post. Can anyone add alternative explanations to it?

Again, if a boat goes out of view in the ocean, is it perception? or actual curvature? If it is curvature, how can binoculars/telescope bring it back into view perfectly flat like it never left? What explanations can we come up with here? This is testable by the "little guy"……we can use our own eyes and senses here, and do not have to so called "rely" on those who have a monopoly on many things like NASA.

I brought it up before, but since I've contested the traditional view on it, it might not have been noticed:
is there any curvature that would similate a straight line?
is there a medium that helps with this (gravity/ electricity/ light properties)?
Yes, it's a good question. Which is the mere illusion, which is truth? Or is there more to it?

[Spaced_Out]

Anyone have any thoughts as the why the UN has the flat earth map on their flag? A false flag perhaps

It is a perspective view of the earth from the N.poles putting no one country in prominence. It is not a flat earth map.

There are in total 2,271 satellites orbiting the earth continuously recording and transmitting data all the algorithms are based on a globe if fact at any one time half of them or in the eastern hemisphere and the other in the western hemispheres - flat earth one would see them all in view at the same time. A conspiracy, you guys are saying every country in the world is in on it not to mention the scriptures.. Flat earth believes are beyond insane - it is not possible to have any kind of logical discussion on this topic.

[Ungläubige]

My sense seems to tell me that if we account for the sun and moon rising and setting only via perspective, then they should
1) diminish to a dot as they approach the horizon, I mean VERY small
2) their perceived approach to the horizon should slow as they get farther and farther away from us (less convinced on this one)

while rotational rising and setting will always cover the same degree of arc in the same amount of time. I believe, based on my limited experience, that rotational rising and setting are correct.

sunset3.jpg (42.02 KiB) Viewed 1425 times

sunset2.jpg (41.66 KiB) Viewed 1425 times

sunset1.jpg (66.92 KiB) Viewed 1425 times

[Ungläubige]

Maybe the surface is flat, with a round dome, with satellites moving in low earth orbit around the flat surface like the sun and moon.

What keeps the satellites flying? They can't carry enough fuel to stay suspended over a flat earth.

It's easily explained if they are orbiting a globe.

I don't really buy into the flat earth no satellite thing. I tend to believe satellites can orbit in low earth orbit. Makes me wonder why i have heard obama twice and NASA have admitted to never being out of low earth orbit. Seriously, why would they admit to that? Does that mean mars and Jupiter are in low earth orbit?

When the first space missions took place, there is a video released by the BBC that I think was supposed to be classified at one time? or they got it by mistake. i dont remember. It showed the astronauts were in space (probably low earth orbit) but the view of earth was manipulated. They were using cameras in a dark part of the space ship about 15 ft or so from a round window that showed earth. this made it look like earth was a round sphere from a long distance. This video is very telling that indeed they were faking stuff. (Plus, where are the stars)

Here is a link:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mCHG6uJH5L8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Especially the end when they turn the lights on.

since you concede that there are satellites in orbit - do you have any theory, either your own or from the web, as to how mankind can place geo-synchronous satellites into orbit over a FLAT EARTH - what keeps them suspended in orbit over a fixed point on the earth?

[Kitkat]

Anyone have any thoughts as the why the UN has the flat earth map on their flag? A false flag perhaps

It is a perspective view of the earth from the N.poles putting no one country in prominence. It is not a flat earth map.

There are in total 2,271 satellites orbiting the earth continuously recording and transmitting data all the algorithms are based on a globe if fact at any one time half of them or in the eastern hemisphere and the other in the western hemispheres - flat earth one would see them all in view at the same time. A conspiracy, you guys are saying every country in the world is in on it not to mention the scriptures.. Flat earth believes are beyond insane - it is not possible to have any kind of logical discussion on this topic.

It looks like the UN got it from someone else who created it in the 1890s, but they just shifted it somewhat:
https://www.digitalcommonwealth.org/sea ... :7h149v85z

The scriptures have plenty of verses where the Lord speaks of an established, upon pillars, foundational, immovable earth - along with a molten looking-glass like dome or vault, upon which "circle" the Lord's throne sits above the clouds. The scriptures speak often of the "Face" of the earth, circle, disk, and esp. where the Lord is taken to an exceedingly high mountain upon which he saw ALL THE KINGDOMS of the world (why the exceedingly high mountain, and how did he see ALL the kingdoms of the world if it was a sphere), if it was some power the Devil used to show him ALL the kingdoms of the world, why do it on an Exceeding high mountain unless it was for perspective to see everything on a flat earth?

Do we really believe the Lord's words in that the devil truly deceived the entire world? Are we open to being deceived on this "science"-god teaching and worship, even a little?

A few example reads of interest where bible verses lend to flat earth (Which from what I have studied, bible authors believed in a flat earth):
https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm
http://testingtheglobe.com/bible.html
http://www.testingtheglobe.com/bible

[Kitkat]

Watch this video of a rocket hitting what looks and sounds like a water dome up in space. Why? Anyone explain why? (hits at around 1:20)

https://youtu.be/IAcp3BFBYw4?t=1m20s

[Kitkat]

My sense seems to tell me that if we account for the sun and moon rising and setting only via perspective, then they should
1) diminish to a dot as they approach the horizon, I mean VERY small
2) their perceived approach to the horizon should slow as they get farther and farther away from us (less convinced on this one)

while rotational rising and setting will always cover the same degree of arc in the same amount of time. I believe, based on my limited experience, that rotational rising and setting are correct.

I thought the same, until I applied some 3D design thinking to perspective.

What do you think about this "law" this author titles, "celestial perspective" which is different from our ground/eye level perspective in the video below? It clarifies how the sun does not need to shrink on a FLAT EARTH model. Watch esp. the experiment with the balls he does in the video.

The proposed law from the video:

An Object Going away from an observer will shrink less and less commensurate, to its distance away, parallel to one's Z axis

From what I understand from this experiment, which makes perfect sense with a FLAT EARTH MODEL and a sunset in such a system - what he is showing (the celestial perspective law) is that the higher up an object is, if it is traveling parallel to the ground (flat earth and sun or moon), the less it will shrink due to one's celestial perspective, as you can no longer apply ground level, or eye level perspective. Watch the video. What am I missing? This makes perfect sense to answer the normal perspective observation that it should shrink as it moves away from perspective on a flat earth model.

https://youtu.be/Vq5ixQytLXE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Alaris]

Science has always had a penthouse suite in the large and spacious building. I voted for globe but will never mock a flat earther just in case one day people refer to round earthers in like manner. Plus mocking is wrong generally speaking. Golden rule and all. Except when Elijah does it.

[Ungläubige]

My sense seems to tell me that if we account for the sun and moon rising and setting only via perspective, then they should
1) diminish to a dot as they approach the horizon, I mean VERY small
2) their perceived approach to the horizon should slow as they get farther and farther away from us (less convinced on this one)

while rotational rising and setting will always cover the same degree of arc in the same amount of time. I believe, based on my limited experience, that rotational rising and setting are correct.

I thought the same, until I applied some 3D design thinking to perspective.

What do you think about this "law" this author titles, "celestial perspective" which is different from our ground/eye level perspective in the video below? It clarifies how the sun does not need to shrink on a FLAT EARTH model. Watch esp. the experiment with the balls he does in the video.

The proposed law from the video:

An Object Going away from an observer will shrink less and less commensurate, to its distance away, parallel to one's Z axis

From what I understand from this experiment, which makes perfect sense with a FLAT EARTH MODEL and a sunset in such a system - what he is showing (the celestial perspective law) is that the higher up an object is, if it is traveling parallel to the ground (flat earth and sun or moon), the less it will shrink due to one's celestial perspective, as you can no longer apply ground level, or eye level perspective. Watch the video. What am I missing? This makes perfect sense to answer the normal perspective observation that it should shrink as it moves away from perspective on a flat earth model.

https://youtu.be/Vq5ixQytLXE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

i don't think it demonstrates what he claims it demonstrates. if i recall, in the initial state the "far" ball is about 7 ft away from the camera and the "near" ball is 1 ft away. he then raises the camera straight up 7 feet and views both balls from above. The "near" ball shrinks greatly in perspective, the "far" ball remains roughly the same - as you'd expect since the distance from the camera to the near ball increased greatly, and the distance to the "far" ball increases only slightly (% wise). (lets say that he raised the camera another 21 ft up - both perpective views will decrease in size, right? keep going higher and higher, and they both disappear to specks, eventually)

this isn't really the right experiment imo

a better demonstration would be to put your eyes at the surface level of a long table. look from your end of the table to the far end. hold a ping pong ball a foot above your head, look up at the ball and note the perceived size. now have a buddy hold that ball at a foot above the table, but at the far end - look from your end of the table to the far end - see how the perceived size of the ball has changed...

[Joel]

The Mandela effect is a glitch in the matrix simulation, this theory explains why we never see the real earth and stars its all CGI, it's why Antarctica is a lot bigger and probably goes on a lot further like admaral Byrd said. It's why things have changed, how can someone change things in our memories, books and films changing in our houses, the Bible changing.
This explains all of it.

Many people including top physicists and entrepreneurs such as Elon Musk Lee that we could be living within a simulation possibly run by a future generation of ourselves possibly by an alien or some kind of advanced Extra-Terrestrial advanced life form, but all the maths work out, as you can see there are signs to show that we are living in a simulated universe, for those who are experiencing it, it's very real, is this a glitch or has a variable changed, and if so what does that mean to us?.

[cayenne]

Science has always had a penthouse suite in the large and spacious building. I voted for globe but will never mock a flat earther just in case one day people refer to round earthers in like manner. Plus mocking is wrong generally speaking. Golden rule and all. Except when Elijah does it.

I like this, short, sweet, and makes a great point!

[cyclOps]

Science has always had a penthouse suite in the large and spacious building. I voted for globe but will never mock a flat earther just in case one day people refer to round earthers in like manner. Plus mocking is wrong generally speaking. Golden rule and all. Except when Elijah does it.

No mocking required. Love the flat-earther, hate the theory.

[cayenne]

Motive: I have heard people ask what motive would there be to hide the shape of the earth. I believe to understand this we must look at the big picture. The PTB want control, they want us mindless in debt slaves. In order to do this they have re-written history, they brainwash us through textbooks, universities, media, etc…..Let me give one of many examples i could give to set up the hide flat earth motive.

It is simple. God is real, he has given us real scriptures to help guide us in his spirt. He has made the scriptures plain and literal throughout (except of course when it is obviously symbolic, parallels, etc)

The PTB needed desperately to go after the word of God. They needed to try to get people to loose faith. But how? simple, its called evolution. This has been a 2 prong attack. 1. They knew it would get a lot of people to stop believing, or never believe in God. They have many believing we are just a random ball floating in space and life just happened to come into play. Ah, then comes step 2. They knew that you can't get everyone to quit on God, so the back up plan was to get people to de-litralize plain scripture. When God says he created each kind of animal to ONLY create their own kind, well, that does not really mean that! Or God flooded the WHOLE earth, well, it had to be more localized. God says Moses parted the sea, well it must have been the tides. God says don't lie, well, that doesn't mean all the time. etc

By breaking the foundation of the creation and flood accounts which are pretty plain and LITERAL to understand, (and actually back up observable repeatable science on many things) they attempt to break the literal word of God so everyone becomes a scattered law unto themselves.

Break God in people, they become hopeless slaves to humanism!


Now, there are a lot of scriptures that point to the shape of the earth. many involve mentioning pillars, the firmament (dome) etc…..lots of them

So you have those Zionist banking cartel families controlling most the money, the FED, the media, etc who suddenly fly rockets in space and they start hitting a dome. Uh oh, then they try nuking the dome. That doesn't work ether. Well, since they control much of the world through money, media, etc, and they need to continue to push God out, what would the dome represent? If the public knew the earth was a plain and had a dome, how can they push evolution random? Every human would know something built that dome! To make matters worse for them, the dome is mentioned throughout scripture, so now not only is it going to be out of the bag that something built the dome with greater intelligence than humans, but it is literally right there in the Bible. Uh oh, if the Bible is literal, than that means each animal only produces its own kind like the Bible says. That means the flood was real over the whole earth, and the sea actually parted for Moses, and lying is sin all the time……They would loose power quickly.

Why does one think the space program is militarized? Why are gps systems hooked into CIA, etc….why can't we go to the antarctic without being turned around?

This same cover-up pattern has went on in many field of science including archeology. Do whatever it takes to get people to quit on God, or at least de-literalize plain scripture so you will not see God as absolute in his laws.

[markharr]

OK, let's try this.

You don't have to take anyone's word for it. You can see for yourself for $700 + the cost of a gopro.

http://www.highaltitudescience.com/prod ... -space-kit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[oneClimbs]

The sun is spherical, so is the moon and all the planets. It's clear that the earth spins around the sun like the other planets do. Alma 30:44 states, "yea, even the earth, and all things that are upon the face of it, yea, and its motion, yea, and also all the planets which move in their regular form..." I'm not sure why people don't want to accept that. What happens when you get to the edge of the earth, do the oceans fall of the edge or is it like a big bowl? What is under the earth? More stars? When you see the constellations revolving from horizon to horizon how do they end up back on the other side? What purposes of God are destroyed by the earth being a sphere? Why can't the perspectives of the ancient people be seen as them simply teaching from their relative perspective. After all, we still say sunrise and sunset today, even know we know that the sun isn't actually moving. It is just a simple way to describe what we are seeing from our relative position. Same with "up" and "down" or any direction. Direction is only useful if it operates in a relative environment.

[larsenb]

This thread is still going????!!!!

I'll never cease to be amazed at what people convince themselves to believe in.

I've got a friend that did the 'sail around the world' thing. Very believable fellow, PhD in geology. John Glenn and my friend's testimony are enough to convince me the earth is round. Of course, I would never reveal to this friend that I hang out on this blog . Too embarrassing. He also teaches science on a science-related cruise ship that goes to various parts of this round earth.

At least this forum is one where you can bring up almost anything. In this respect, a very open minded place.

[JohnnyL]

The sun is spherical, so is the moon and all the planets. It's clear that the earth spins around the sun like the other planets do. Alma 30:44 states, "yea, even the earth, and all things that are upon the face of it, yea, and its motion, yea, and also all the planets which move in their regular form..." I'm not sure why people don't want to accept that. What happens when you get to the edge of the earth, do the oceans fall of the edge or is it like a big bowl? What is under the earth? More stars? When you see the constellations revolving from horizon to horizon how do they end up back on the other side? What purposes of God are destroyed by the earth being a sphere? Why can't the perspectives of the ancient people be seen as them simply teaching from their relative perspective. After all, we still say sunrise and sunset today, even know we know that the sun isn't actually moving. It is just a simple way to describe what we are seeing from our relative position. Same with "up" and "down" or any direction. Direction is only useful if it operates in a relative environment.

5tev3, have you watched one of the many videos posted, read anything on it, etc.?
Alma says... what? exactly that means the planets are spheres?

[JohnnyL]

I'll never cease to be amazed at what people convince themselves to believe in.

That's exactly how ripliancum feels about your belief in Mesoamerica BoM, too.
Interesting, eh? ;)