Questions About the Flat Earth

Latitude is measured simply by observation of the elevation angle of the pole star from the viewers position .All ok for the N latitudes but only down to about 20 degrees  N because apparently atmospheric refraction makes for unreliable observation. The mariners  of the past knew this.

So the whole concept of the equator being the mid point is a bit of fiction to me.Can't see the pole star from there . It's the mid point of the suns travels across the tropics . It's an invention necessary for the globe myth.

So how do we know the accuracy of Southern latitude mapping ?

The south magnetic dip pole , according to British Geological Survey, is at around 66 degrees S . So how we map anything below that . Maybe that's why we cant go into southern polar regions .
I saw some posts about albatross migration around the southern seas ( thanks for that info ). Thy don't fly below that exclusion zone so birds are also banned from going there obviously he he .

The "True " south pole (where they stick the axis) is also a fiction and so is the geomagnetic S pole - it is based on an imaginary bar magnet in earth's interior . All BGS words , not mine .

Basically the earth's dimension we are given are just more brain washing - including
the AE map which is just the globe ironed out.

Must go now sorry , but there's more - the wife has entered the cafe .

RedorBlue, On one hand you seem to disparage some things maybe you shouldn't disparage, and cling to some things maybe you shouldn't cling to. The lexicon of the imaginary spaceball must give way to a more accurate use of words when describing the actual construct of the plane we live on. Simply put, certain concepts, and the words attached to those concepts, need to find their way to a watery burial at sea, never to surface again.

RedorBlue wrote:Latitude is measured simply by observation of the elevation angle of the pole star from the viewers position .All ok for the N latitudes but only down to about 20 degrees  N because apparently atmospheric refraction makes for unreliable observation. The mariners  of the past knew this.

[Any unit of measurement is the same throughout it's length. One mile (assuming 'mile' is the standard of measurement used) from the center point of a circle, is one million segmented miles, units, from the center point, regardless if man has gone far enough to measure that whole length. So there is no reason to believe there is an inaccuracy of measurement beyond the latitudes south of the equator. Once the unit of measure is established, that unit remains accurate the further from the starting center point one goes (i.e., if I take my vehicle to any point south of the equator, one latitude line still equals roughly 69 miles no matter how far south of the equator I go, and is confirmed by the change of 1 degree of latitude on my gps).]

So the whole concept of the equator being the mid point is a bit of fiction to me.Can't see the pole star from there . It's the mid point of the suns travels across the tropics . It's an invention necessary for the globe myth.

[The pole star can be seen south of the equator. And it should be pointed out that, as with other demonstrable facts in nature, the sun's zenith on equinox, at that point of time during the day that the stick has no shadow, is an observation anchored to the demonstrable, and not an invention.]

So how do we know the accuracy of Southern latitude mapping ?

[Our unit of measure, latitude line, begins 69 miles from the north center point with the 1st line, and extends outward until it's proven there is no more outward to extend to (which has yet to be proven one way or another, unless Freemason Byrd discovered a termination point in his travels. But being a Freemason, we wouldn't expect anything such as 'truth' about the matter from him).]

The south magnetic dip pole , according to British Geological Survey, is at around 66 degrees S . So how we map anything below that . Maybe that's why we cant go into southern polar regions .
I saw some posts about albatross migration around the southern seas ( thanks for that info ). Thy don't fly below that exclusion zone so birds are also banned from going there obviously he he .

[When you say "can't go into southern polar regions," why can't we? Since there is no South Pole, other than an arbitrary point designated by a barber's pole in the ground along the 360 degree ice rim encircling the land masses of known Earth, why are you claiming such a 'pole' exists? With proper supply lines reaching in a straight line, further and further south, there's no reason to set an imagined limit as to how far man can go south with proper equipment and funding.

polar (adj.) 1550s, from Middle French polaire (16c.) or directly from Medieval Latin polaris "of or pertaining to the poles," from Latin polus "an end of an axis" (see pole (n.2)). Meaning "directly opposite in character or tendency" is attested from 1832. --Online Etymology Dictionary

Obviously, since the whole of the southern region is the vast territory surrounding all of the Earth, claiming it a 'pole,' or that it is "an end of an axis," is one of those concepts requiring burial at sea.

Rowbotham discussed the "dip sector" in 3rd edition of his book, quoting John Herschel's inane prattle, beginning on page 180. Sir John Herschel (a Brit knighted by the inbred royals) was also chummy with Darwin. And the British Geological Survey certainly isn't going to be the tip of the spear all things flat Earth knowledge.

Regarding the Herschel/Darwin relationship, see, https://tinyurl.com/y7z8nn9j]

The "True " south pole (where they stick the axis) is also a fiction and so is the geomagnetic S pole - it is based on an imaginary bar magnet in earth's interior . All BGS words , not mine .

Basically the earth's dimension we are given are just more brain washing - including
the AE map which is just the globe ironed out.

[I have to disagree that the AE map is "just more brain washing." Here is what we know; 1) Midnight Sun proves the sun travels a circumpolar path around the North Pole. 2) The distance of the sun's influence is quantified annually as it expands/contracts around that center point. 3) All land masses of Earth are situated around that center point, and since having travelled throughout the united States, I am able to verify the rough figures of its length and breadth, in miles, and I am also confident that other folks in the sundry nations are somewhat cognizant, as I am, of the rough size of the territories they find themselves, with all of those territories situated around the north central point-- with more proof, the known distances of flight paths between major international cities also bearing witness as to the size of the habitable earth.]

Must go now sorry , but there's more - the wife has entered the cafe .

You are correct Markwilson - my post was written in haste and a bit garbled , time constraint , so I'll try to explain my position a bit better.

Latitude is not a measure of distance but is a measure of angle . Not so many miles or yards or feet ,but degrees minutes and seconds . The angle between the pole star and the point of observation on our earth plane  . If viewed from the north pole then latitude is 90 degrees straight above and at some distance away you will be at whatever latitude that measured angle to the pole star equates to .
The distance between degrees of latitude then becomes dependent on the shape of the earth and the distance to the pole star.
Helio model originally had the earth as a perfect sphere 24000 miles or so in diameter and the pole star so far away that it's light rays are parallel and this gave rise to the "each degree is 69 miles apart" or whatever distance .

Then Newtons gravity model predicted that earth would be an oblate sphere flattened at the poles with a bulging equator. This would mean degrees of latitude lengthening polewards - each degree increasing in distance from equator to pole ,and the pole star still at incredible distance . No standard distance between each degree.

So in order to test which shape matched best it was decided to carry out a survey of an arc of longitude across France with the very best optical instruments which would cross several degrees of latitude .
In the 1670s Giovanni Cassini - head of the French Academy of Science - was tasked
with this survey . Took him and his team a few years and the results shattered both models .
         Cassini found that latitude shortened towards the North pole - each sucessive
degree changed by 1/800th in distance from the South of France to the North.

His results were checked and were correct . Never refuted but ignored after his death. This was , as far as I can find , the last true survey of earth without spherical calculations being applied to results .

He thought that earth may be a prolate sphere but those latitude characteristics are also those of a plane with a polestar at a measurable distance . My view that.

This is all researchable online and in books - it's hidden like all truths but it is there.
I don't have a problem with measuring landmasses . It's the oceans and seas and the fact that latitudes are problematic although we are led to believe differently. So I have a problem with the AE map in that is the globe map with the spherical math removed - maybe the equator is not where it is said to be is my point since latitude is dependent on the shape of the earth . 90 degrees on a globe won't be the same distance as 90 degrees on a plane .



Your point about the British Geological Survey - I know it is mainstream . When I can I will post a link .

It gives a good account of the imaginary poles . It also states the the southern mag dip pole can be found by experiment in principle - which to me says that it hasn't yet been done.

The Antarctic treaty limits access to the polar regions. Maybe this is why.

Sorry about rambling on  and I hope it's not too preachy . I can try and dig out some links etc if you need them but it may take a while.

Hi to both RaB and MW.
Regardless where two people are on earth, if they travel due south they would eventually meet at the south pole. I know this is not possible, but if we could go as far as we are allowed then try to detect each other via radar, would this prove falsities in maps, globe and measurement? I would expect someone who started off in Chile and the other in Australia to be much further away from each other on plan than globe.

First a comment about Rob Skiba. I first came across this speaker about 4 months ago and he showed a decent knowledge about Flat Earth, although he said he was still "on the fence" about a few things. He has participated in some of the many experiments and i assumed he was gradually beginning to see the truth. He also showed a great knowledge of the Bible and its relationship to Flat Earth, referring to pages which described the Earth's flatness. I had then not seen any of his vids for a few months, until about an hour ago.
In this video, Mr. Skiba was talking about the Flat Earth map and using it to explain how plane flights in the southern hemisphere may actually be explainable by the use of a globe afterall! This i had to see. He proceeded to describe how the latitudinal lines do NOT diverge as you go further and further south. He said they actually maintain the same distance from each other on the Flat Earth map, no matter if you are in North America or South America (even though they don't appear to). After explaining this point, he then showed how a flight from Australia to South America really is the shortest route on a globe even though it doesn't appear to. What happened to this guy? He seemed so smart before.
Now my next issue. This is the point about the Earth's elliptical orbit around the Sun. It has been said that when the Earth is closest to the Sun, it is the winter, and when it is furthest, it is summer. An obvious problem when distance from the Sun seems to matter. One might say "ha! Caught 'em." I would say "they can't be that stupid". They made all this up. The whole solar system idea is all their's. So why would they leave themselves open like that? I would guess because they don't care.

zeek_44 wrote:First a comment about Rob Skiba. I first came across this speaker about 4 months ago and he showed a decent knowledge about Flat Earth, although he said he was still "on the fence" about a few things. He has participated in some of the many experiments and i assumed he was gradually beginning to see the truth. He also showed a great knowledge of the Bible and its relationship to Flat Earth, referring to pages which described the Earth's flatness. I had then not seen any of his vids for a few months, until about an hour ago.
In this video, Mr. Skiba was talking about the Flat Earth map and using it to explain how plane flights in the southern hemisphere may actually be explainable by the use of a globe afterall! This i had to see. He proceeded to describe how the latitudinal lines do NOT diverge as you go further and further south. He said they actually maintain the same distance from each other on the Flat Earth map, no matter if you are in North America or South America (even though they don't appear to). After explaining this point, he then showed how a flight from Australia to South America really is the shortest route on a globe even though it doesn't appear to. What happened to this guy? He seemed so smart before.
Now my next issue. This is the point about the Earth's elliptical orbit around the Sun. It has been said that when the Earth is closest to the Sun, it is the winter, and when it is furthest, it is summer. An obvious problem when distance from the Sun seems to matter. One might say "ha! Caught 'em." I would say "they can't be that stupid". They made all this up. The whole solar system idea is all their's. So why would they leave themselves open like that? I would guess because they don't care.  

Welcome to IFERS!

First, it should be known that the ramblings of Rob Skiba are, at best, entertaining to ponder, such as the Nephilim and some other topics. Entertainment is not always informative and at this point, Rob Skiba is more of an entertainer.

Next, to successfully rebuke or even criticize the heliocentric model, it might be best to understand it first. The round-Earth, round-planet, heliocentric model adjusts for round-Earth summers and winters by postulating that the round-Earth is tilted on an axis, at approximately 23.4 degrees, and this round-Earth north pole always points directly at the North Star as it orbits the sun.

The result of the tilt is that for about half of the round-earth year the northern hemisphere has more direct angular exposure to the sun and is therefore warmer than the southern hemisphere in the northern hemisphere months of spring and summer. In northern hemisphere fall and winter, the heliocentric model would state that the round-Earth northern hemisphere is tilted away from the sun, and the round-Earth north pole remains constantly pointed at the North Star.

The heliocentric, round-Earth conclusion is that Winter and Summer are products of angular exposure, not distance.

The flat-Earth model is that the Earth is a motionless, flat-plane of existence of as-yet-unknown (or unrevealed) dimensions. The sun travels above the flat-Earth in a cyclic pattern spiraling around the north pole, which is the center of the flat-Earth and there is no south pole. The spiral tightens around the north pole in north-summer (south-winter) and relaxes outward in the south-summer (north-winter).

So yes, distance to the sun determines summer and winter. But only on the flat-Earth.

You really need to read Eric Dubay's book, The Earth Plane http://ifers.123.st/t303-the-earth-plane-flat-earth-children-s-book#11905 ... this book is entertaining AND informative.

zeek_44 wrote:
next issue
Earth's elliptical orbit around the Sun
the Earth is closest to the Sun [in] winter

Clearly, the Priests who promoted heliocentricism, beginning in the 1500's, could not account for all aspects of their deception; so, in the 19th century they invented "angular exposure" and "tilt" to account for these glaring errors.  Which means, once Freemasons start exploring the man-made construct of space, again, they will tilt their Spacecraft as they approach the Sun, and allow angular exposure to kep the crew quarters at room temperature.

/sarcasm off

There are many paid to amuse us, some wear clown faces, while others draw theoretical equations based on science fiction stories.

This is my first post here and I've only been taking FE serious for the past 10 months or so and I'm still a bit sceptical and unsure about certain things which obviously discourages me from "coming out" to my friends and family. However after watching Planet Earth, a BBC documentary the other day I was kind of blown away by what the presenter said, especially with it coming from the BBC. I have searched on here with no results, listened to a lot of Eric's and others videos but haven't seen anyone mention the Abyssal plain. I'll let Sir David Attenborough explain.

It's from Planet Earth episode 2.

A flat, underwater plain that takes up more than 50% of the Earths surface, just how is that possible on a globe?
Have any of you heard of this? Thank you

Samtheman91 wrote:

A flat, underwater plain that takes up more than 50% of the Earths surface, just how is that possible on a globe?
Have any of you heard of this? Thank you

Yes, it is flat as above sea level is flat , thanks for your post.

Hey Eric, any idea when you maybe talking with Owen Benjamin?

Sorry if this is in the wrong section.

Alpha wrote:
Eric
any idea when you maybe talking with Owen Benjamin?

Owen Benjamin, you mean the self proclaimed, one quarter Jew?  bahaha

NO, Eric doesn't need to chat with a Hollywood, Zionist Jew entertainer, about flat Earth.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMW6HhufPKo

Schpankme wrote:

Alpha wrote:
Eric
any idea when you maybe talking with Owen Benjamin?

Owen Benjamin, you mean the self proclaimed, one quarter Jew?  bahaha

NO, Eric doesn't need to chat with a Hollywood, Zionist Jew entertainer, about flat Earth.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMW6HhufPKo

I just heard that he was going to debate Eric and wanted to know if there was any true in it.

I've flat-bombed his live-chats for the past week and he's invited me on to discuss the subject. I emailed him 4 days ago to schedule but haven't heard back from him. He's claiming it will be a "debate" but since he's started researching the subject he's admitted that he has no evidence for the globe. He says he's "1/4 Jew" but then exposes how that's bullshit because Judaism is not a race. He humorously continued, "you can't be 60% Buddhist, or 20% Christian, so I'm actually not Jewish at all." Any way, hopefully we can have a chat and wake up his listeners.

Admin wrote:I've flat-bombed his live-chats for the past week and he's invited me on to discuss the subject.  I emailed him 4 days ago to schedule but haven't heard back from him.  He's claiming it will be a "debate" but since he's started researching the subject he's admitted that he has no evidence for the globe.  He says he's "1/4 Jew" but then exposes how that's bullshit because Judaism is not a race.  He humorously continued, "you can't be 60% Buddhist, or 20% Christian, so I'm actually not Jewish at all."  Any way, hopefully we can have a chat and wake up his listeners.

Thanks for replying Eric, so you would like to have a chat? You might want to inform Schpankme and ask him to stop speaking for you.

Admin wrote:
I've flat-bombed his live-chats for the past week
he invited me to discuss the subject
I emailed him 4 days ago to schedule but haven't heard back

He's claiming it will be a "debate"
he's admitted no evidence for the globe

He says he's "1/4 Jew"
then exposes how Judaism is not a race

hopefully we can chat and wake up his listeners

Owen Benjamin, looks to have the same connections and handlers as Joe Rogan.

What exactly gives you that impression ^

I've only listened to the last couple of Owen's videos, but he proceeds to shit on Rogan every chance he gets, so I highly doubt that.

Anyway from the last video I saw, he supposedly wants to call up Eric today. So maybe try to reach out to him again?

And yes, the guy has no argument for the globe model, but still thinks the earth being flat is "crazy"

icecap wrote:What exactly gives you that impression ^

I've only listened to the last couple of Owen's videos, but he proceeds to shit on Rogan every chance he gets, so I highly doubt that.

Anyway from the last video I saw, he supposedly wants to call up Eric today. So maybe try to reach out to him again?

And yes, the guy has no argument for the globe model, but still thinks the earth being flat is "crazy"

1st post on IFERS. Chose the nom de plume, "icecap," which probably isn't a favorite nom de plume of many flat earthers. As in "polar ice caps," as in the farcical two pretend poles on a mythological Masonic Spinning Spaceball. You "only listened to the last couple...videos," and yet felt compelled to use your first post here to right away defend the guy? Who are you to demand, in your first post, "what exactly" of anybody? Especially of one of the pillars at IFERS. Please explain.

Explain, please, exactly what "you doubt" about Joe Rogan and his handlers. Or else explain how exactly you are privy to whether or not Owen Benjamin does, or does not, have behind-the-scenes handler(s) Steering his message.

Finally, did you create the account "icecap" for the express purpose of making the challenge in support of Owen Benjamin? Was that the motivation for the new account?

icecap wrote:And yes, the guy has no argument for the globe model, but still thinks the earth being flat is "crazy"

So, like the new phenom on the potato crew block, Logan Paul, who took to the Shillfest 2018 stage to wow the crowd with his I'm-not-really-sure-but-think-I-may-be-a-flat-earther message (with attending Neil disGrace Tyson microphone "gravity" drop), you're animated enough to create an "icecap" account and come into IFERS, and with your very first post promote somebody who "has no argument for the globe model, but still thinks the earth being flat is crazy."

I will take the liberty of assuming your position is the same as his; you have no proof of the Masonic Spinning Spaceball, but also have an aversion to the many demonstrable facts in nature proving beyond any shadow of doubt the Earth is built on a horizontal plane with irregular hills and valleys throughout it.

And you have heartfelt concern that a guy who "thinks the earth being flat is crazy," is being short-shifted here at IFERS?!

Am I going in the right direction here, icecap?

markwilson wrote:

icecap wrote:What exactly gives you that impression ^

I've only listened to the last couple of Owen's videos, but he proceeds to shit on Rogan every chance he gets, so I highly doubt that.

Anyway from the last video I saw, he supposedly wants to call up Eric today. So maybe try to reach out to him again?

And yes, the guy has no argument for the globe model, but still thinks the earth being flat is "crazy"

1st post on IFERS. Chose the nom de plume, "icecap," which probably isn't a favorite nom de plume of many flat earthers. As in "polar ice caps," as in the farcical two pretend poles on a mythological Masonic Spinning Spaceball. You "only listened to the last couple...videos," and yet felt compelled to use your first post here to right away defend the guy? Who are you to demand, in your first post, "what exactly" of anybody? Especially of one of the pillars at IFERS. Please explain.

Explain, please, exactly what "you doubt" about Joe Rogan and his handlers. Or else explain how exactly you are privy to whether or not Owen Benjamin does, or does not, have behind-the-scenes handler(s) Steering his message.

Finally, did you create the account "icecap" for the express purpose of making the challenge in support of Owen Benjamin? Was that the motivation for the new account?

markwilson wrote:

icecap wrote:And yes, the guy has no argument for the globe model, but still thinks the earth being flat is "crazy"

So, like the new phenom on the potato crew block, Logan Paul, who took to the Shillfest 2018 stage to wow the crowd with his I'm-not-really-sure-but-think-I-may-be-a-flat-earther message (with attending Neil disGrace Tyson microphone "gravity" drop), you're animated enough to create an "icecap" account and come into IFERS, and with your very first post promote somebody who "has no argument for the globe model, but still thinks the earth being flat is crazy."

I will take the liberty of assuming your position is the same as his; you have no proof of the Masonic Spinning Spaceball, but also have an aversion to the many demonstrable facts in nature proving beyond any shadow of doubt the Earth is built on a horizontal plane with irregular hills and valleys throughout it.

And you have heartfelt concern that a guy who "thinks the earth being flat is crazy," is being short-shifted here at IFERS?!

Am I going in the right direction here, icecap?

Two replies within 30 minutes? You must be incensed I'll respond to you so that you can have some closure on the subject.

So your paranoid/delusional theory is that I signed up for ifers more than 2 years ago (my join date is in 2017... just like yours!   ) so that I could one day come on here and defend Owen Benjamin? Does that really make sense to you? And icecap was a name given to me when i was like 14 (i'm 32 now) playing the counter-strike beta with a clan named Arctic-Krew (they all had arctic related names...) Which is kind of irrelevant since there are certainly ice caps (large swathes of ice...) on this flat earth.

The reality is that I was watching a flat earth video and it was mentioned that Eric Dubay might be debating some guy called Owen Benjamin pretty soon. I'm a big fan of Eric, especially his interviews, so I naturally got excited for it. I had never even heard the name Owen Benjamin before, so i went to his channel and watched his last couple of videos. I then came here to see if there had been any discussion on the subject, and there had! I didn't "defend" him at all. I was responding to the claim that he has the same handlers as Joe Rogan, which seemed unlikely since Owen shit on Rogan a multitude of times in the 2 or 3 videos I saw from Owen. Rogan is a man that i vehemently despise ever since his obvious selling out to "the powers that be". I haven't made a final verdict on owen yet, but he seems like a genuine dude, albeit a blue belt in truth. He is entertaining, so I'll keep watching for now.

As for whether or not I'm a "true" flat earther is nothing more than a laughable dick measuring contest brought upon by your own over-inflated ego. I'll indulge you, however. I've been looking into the true nature of the world we live in even before the modern day resurgence of the flat earth movement. I remember back in the mid 2000's reading about flat earth and hollow earth on ATS (i know, a controlled opposition forum that I haven't visited for a decade or so now). It wasn't until I came across Eric Dubay and his videos that I truly began to believe, so for that I will always be grateful to him.

Also, the reason I hadn't posted until now despite signing up in 2017 is because this forum is, to put it mildly, not very good. I signed up because I truly love Eric Dubay and wanted to support him and his work, but this forum is largely controlled by a couple of passive-aggressive and aggressive-aggressive characters that don't quite make for an especially conducive environment for discussion. I wish it were otherwise because I would love to post at a flat earth forum regularly, but none exist.

I'm sure that did nothing to relieve your paranoia, but I tried

icecap wrote:
the reason
I hadn't posted until now despite signing up in 2017
this forum is not very good
this forum is largely controlled by a couple of passive-aggressive and aggressive-aggressive characters
that don't quite make for an especially conducive environment for discussion
I wish it were otherwise
I would love to post at a flat earth forum regularly
but none exist

Welcome back.

icecap wrote:I wish it were otherwise because I would love to post at a flat earth forum regularly, but none exist.

Keep pounding away on those keys. You're making a better argument than I ever could! Was that a Freudian slip revealing maybe a bit more than you intended? Or does IFERS exist in that realm of flat earth forums you profess "don't exist"?

Let's review:

1) You signed up in 2017, still clinging to the 'icecap' nickname assigned to you in childhood, though now 32, never imagining that a bunch of flat earthers would suspect an inference to the spaceball ice cap poles on the bottom and top of that mythological absurdity.

2) Over the intervening months you didn't post here regularly (not once, to be specific) because no flat earth forums existed during that time worthy of your effort.

3) The forum's value is made up by the fine people contributing here, so when you blithely denigrate it by saying "this forum is, to put it mildly, not very good," you insult us all.

Thanks for that valuable first post, and more revealing second post. You should ask Eric for admin privileges so you can mold it into the type of forum allowing your conscience to finally post on "regularly" without those rascals you would expel in order to meet your high standards.

Despite not participating, I've read quite a few threads here over the years. I respect this forum for it's wealth of information, it's just not very welcoming to new members (look how I was greeted) due to certain aggressive and paranoid individuals.

I'm sure Eric is fine with the state of the forum, and there's nothing wrong with that. Not all forums actively seek out and welcome new members. I understand wanting a more focused and no-nonsense discussion board. It's just not for me.

I'll keep watching and supporting Eric's work regardless. I hope to hear more interviews from you, Eric. Take care.

icecap wrote:...it's just not very welcoming to new members (look how I was greeted) due to certain aggressive and paranoid individuals [i.e., Mark Wilson].

Moses put a veil over his face to mitigate the brilliance of his righteous countenance after one of those chats with the lord of Bible Babylon. You might consider giving it a try in the future when reaching out to the rabble like myself.

Probably a guy that finally overcomes his disgust for a "flat earth forum...[where] none exist," and chooses nonetheless to finally comment at IFERS, and coming to the defense of another guy who "has no argument for the globe model, but still thinks the earth being flat is crazy," should consider attending the Logan Paul School of Fence Riding to fine tune his hypocrisy (as a bonus he'll show you how to get "gravity" working in your favor when dropping microphones during the now annual Toxic Twins' Shillfests).

You're not new here since you've been silently observing, we are to believe, for many months and knew what to expect when standing in another's stead and yet choosing to defend a flimflam man having no logical argument for "the globe model, but still thinks the earth being flat is crazy."

All those months biding your time until overcoming your own self-righteousness to deign comment, and you belly-flop right out of the gate. Walking it back was the only viable option.

Hello Everybody,

I've only just stumbled across all of this amazing Flat earth information in the last month or two and I'm still in the experimental phase, but I'm leaning very heavily toward the Earth being flat and stationary as Eric describes. Generally, most of the questions that are raised in my observations have been sufficiently answered with this model, and hopefully the following couple can also be satisfactorily explained.

Currently in the Southern Hemisphere, it seems that the sun casts a shadow in the early morning and late evening (sunrise and sunset) in the opposite direction (north) to that which it casts in the middle of the day (south). Essentially, it covers an arc beyond 180 degrees. As far as I can tell, the Flat Earth model (definitely) and the Heliocentric model (possibly) prohibit the shadow's arc from exceeding 180 degrees throughout the day, although possibly in the middle of summer at a distance near the tropic of Capricorn coupled with the 23.5 degree tilt it may be possible with the Heliocentric model. Is there some way the Flat Earth model can account for this?

The phases of the moon seem to have a direct relationship with the relative position of the sun. Now I understand why it is said that the moon generates its own light, and definitely agree that a disc is the most likely shape of the moon, but why would the moon only generate light on the side adjacent to the sun if there is no relationship between the moon phases and the position of the sun? In conspiracy circles it is often said that there are no such thing as coincidences, therefore there must be a reason for this?

That's all I have at the moment. It's great to be here discussing this most interesting subject.

Thanks

rotor wrote:
the sun casts a shadow

"Drive a stake into the ground in such a position as to expose it to the sun for the greater part of a day - the whole day if possible.  Mark the end of the shadow every quarter of an hour, and you will find that the marks form part of an elongated curve, clearly proving that the sun moves over a stationary earth."  
~Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny” (113)

“The Path of the Sun is Concentric, expanding and contracting daily for six months alternately. This expansion and contraction of the Sun's path continues every year, and is termed the Northern and Southern Declination, and should demonstrate to Modem Astronomers the absurdity of calling the World a Planet, as it remains stationary while the Sun continues circling round the heavens.”
~David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma” (184-5)

OBELISK SUNDIAL TIMELAPSE - YIN YANG
youtube.com/watch?v=kWw4egZv4uU

rotor wrote:
The phases of the moon seem to have a direct relationship with the relative position of the sun

Space.com
8 Oct 2014
Rare Selenelion Total Lunar Eclipse

Lunar eclipse - a selenelion occurs when both the Sun and the eclipsed Moon can be observed at the same time in the sky.

ref: ifers.123.st/t183-total-eclipse-of-the-mind#4789
ref: ifers.123.st/t183-total-eclipse-of-the-mind#8027