LF: *One-Stop Complete Resource Directory For Flat-Earth EvidenceHERE*

Title: *One-Stop Complete Resource Directory For Flat-Earth EvidenceHERE*
Source: Flat Earth Science And The Bible
URL Source: https://flatearthscienceandbible.co ... t-works-and-why-we-believe-it/
Published: Mar 31, 2019
Author: Flat Earth Science and the Bible
Post Date: 2019-03-31 15:02:34 by Liberator
Keywords: FLAT-EARTH, RESOURCE, DIRECTORY
Views: 8052
Comments: 78

Introduction to the Flat Earth, How it Works, and Why We Believe It

If this is your first time hearing about the flat earth, your first reaction may be like most people: shock, laughter, scoffing, and avoidance. But the Flat Earth Movement is exploding like wildfire and it’s not because it’s just cool or a good distraction. Surprisingly the Flat Earth belief is backed by solid science and undeniable visual evidence.
So what is the Flat Earth all about and how does it work?

INTRODUCING THE FLAT EARTH:

The Earth

The Flat Earth is set on a flat non-moving stationary foundation (1 Samuel 2:8; 1 Chronicles 16:30; Psalms 93:1; Psalms 96: 9-11). All the continents center around the North Pole and are surrounded by Ocean. Surrounding the flat earth 360 degrees on all sides is Antarctica. It is also known as the Antarctic ice wall and has been measured at 200 ft high and and thousands of miles long. Captain Cook sailed along the ice wall for 60,000 miles and never found an inlet. Bet you never heard about that in your history books.
The "South Pole" does not exist.

The Dome

There are different opinions on what is above the flat earth, but the general flat earth belief is that the earth’s sky is surrounded by a sky dome the holds in the air and protects us. The Bible says it is made of glass (Job 37:18). The Bible clearly describes a firm dome (firmament) IN which the sun and moon were placed (Genesis 1:14-19).

(Below are typical "Planetariums, which coincidentally utilize their own respective "Dome" which precisely mirrors the Firmament as described in the Bible, along with its depiction of the stars, Moon, Sun, and planets.):

The Sun and Moon The sun and moon are close and small and are located inside the dome/Firmament. They circle around and above the flat earth creating day and night and the seasons.

This is the most spectacularly extensive and comprehensive online site I've seen with respect to Flat Earth. Categorized and sub-categorized neatly, Flat Earth issues are addressed, examined, explained both scientifically and Biblically.

1) FLAT EARTH PROOF
2) HOW IT WORKS
3) GLOBE DECEPTION
4) BIBLICAL PROOF
FLAT EARTH FAQ:

http://flatearthscienceandbible.com/2016/02/10/flat-earth-frequently-asked-questions/

Many links are available -- although many have been purged and are still being removed as Flat Earth information is considered dangerous to the Powers That Be.

Bookmark the site for present/future reference. We don't know when this site or others which are deemed "dangerous conspiracy theories" may suddenly be erased.

"And the teachers and those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament, and those who turn many to righteousness shall give forth light like the stars forever and ever.

But you, O Daniel, shut up the words and seal the Book until the time of the end. Then many shall run to and fro and search anxiously through the Book, and knowledge of God's purposes as revealed by His prophets shall be increased and become great. ~ Daniel 12:3-4

See any other flat planets out there?
Ever see the edge-on view of ours from the ISS? (You can watch it in realtime with any browser.)
How does the physics work to keep a flat planet from tearing itself apart?

This may p*ss you off AND make you think I'm even crazier, but unfortunately from the International Space Station footage I've seen it's included sloppy CGI, stunts, and smoke & mirror theater. The web is chock full of what's below:

The whole Mars "lander" shtick is also not real. Then again NASA must keep on justifying it's budget of $52 mil. ( I'd better stop now before you believe I'm a CTer. Oh wait...)

The "planets" aren't according the Flat Earth/Bible-based doctrine. The stars, planets, Moon and Sun are not 3D contructs; They are contained within the Firmament/Dome. (Just as depicted in a typical Planetarium if you've ever been in one.)

Typically, the "chromaky" screens (that term is new to me, I admit) are a single solid color, usually green as that's the color people are least likely to wear. They are often used for weather reporters as they have full size maps they want people to see in the backdrop.

I'm uncertain of the specifics but it seems a grid pattern screen would be less useful as a backdrop for chromaky purposes. I would speculate the grid pattern to be useful in being able to visually measure the distances things move in a zero G environment. That's assuming it wouldn't have a more mundane purose of simply acting as a curtain of sorts.

Another thought looking at the flat earth map... is the distance from Chile to New Zealand. It seems I can book a flight from Santiago Chile to Auckland New Zealand that is about a 13 hour flight non stop. The shortest route on that flat earth map would take that flight up the US west coast and Alaska, and roughly using the width of the USA as a 3000 mile measure, it would seem that distance would be about 18,000 miles, give or take.

Covering that distance in 13 hours would require a speed of about 1380 MPH, close to mach 2, which is far above the speeds conventional airline aircraft are capable of.

I'm sure you are aware of the enormity of contradictions that a flat earth model must explain. What ever information is on that comprehensive web site, I'm sure it will need much more.

Yes, many of us have been familiar with the Green Screen for what? 20 years plus? Yup, routinely used as the backdrop for news reporters and weather.

Your theory that the blue grid is used for measurements and precision in a Zero G environment is both logical and sensible.

The reason and function for it can be explained far more precisely and specifically by someone far more familiar with the technology at Post #23. IMO its an excellent rebuttal to "It's fake!!"

Covering that distance in 13 hours would require a speed of about 1380 MPH, close to mach 2, which is far above the speeds conventional airline aircraft are capable of.

I agree with your assessment of that particular map and how it would drastically distort time/distance as the crow flies. But again, the map is not to scale.

I'm sure you are aware of the enormity of contradictions that a flat earth model must explain. What ever information is on that comprehensive web site, I'm sure it will need much more.

The site is as "comprehensive" as I've seen thus far in that it categorizes subjects, issues, and FAQ more than any thus far. Only the patient or those with sufficient interest will access it.

There is a vast expanse of new knowledge and information on the Flat earth subject. I am still digesting the logical, probable, plausible and proven. At the same time I have been trying to vet, discard, and sift through the opposites. I've also had to be discerning about disinfo/misinfo sites and its individuals.

I see no appreciable curvature from the air (high altitude balloon with no convex lens (The rebuttal is obvious that "from Space" the earth appears curved/round. The author and source of all those photos are one and the same: NASA.)

I will say (from my honest perspective) that the more I research the subject, stronger the evidence for Flat Earth becomes. In one video, the subject addressed was your forte: "Geometry."

I accept that it may not be to scale. However, my estimate of the distance would have to be off by more than double in order to bring the required speed down to what conventional airline jets are reputed to be capable of flying. And if the distance from Santiago to Auckland is only 9000 miles via the northern Pacific ocean, then it means the distance of everything else is also, more or less, halved.

I would press you on this particular contradiction as to me it's a glaring clear fact that seems to singlehandedly destroy the flat earth theory. I searched for an airline ticket from Santiago, Chile to Auckland, New Zealand. and found one advertising a 13 hour flight, non stop.

This site, which presumably bases this distance on a spherical earth, claims the distance as 6010 miles. Covering that distance in 13 hours (I recall the time being 12:55 but 13 is close enough) would yield a speed of about 462 MPH, well within the speed a standard airline is reputed to be capable.

Maybe the properly scaled flat earth map shows these 2 cities far closer than I estimated.

Maybe commercial airlines are secretly capable of mach 2 speeds (and also have enough fuel to sustain that speed for 13 hours).

Whatever. Take your pick, but no more posts about NASA being a fake entity. That is immaterial to your flat earth case.

You've hit paydirt with your circumnavigation examples. Nicely done. For obvious reasons, the flat earthers won't ever tell us exactly where the "seam" is that we allegedly use to join together the edges of the flat earth into our phony Globe Of Deception.

I hope you're not expecting a gracious concession 'cause that ain't gonna happen. You're obviously debating a known cultic personality.

I have had many serious, in-depth and thoughtful discussions with Liberator, so much so that I will vouch for his honesty and integrity in spite of our disagreements, unlike the several here I have on bozo. While I am honestly surprised to see him take this position, I had already come to appreciate the incredible and very underrated ability of the human mind to believe things that are not true. In that way, it could be said that someone believing in a flat earth is not demonstrating anything any more unusual than someone honestly believing socialism would lead to economic utopia for all, or a Muslim jihadist honestly believing that an all powerful God would need help in destroying people who don't believe in Allah.

A look around here on LF shows just how abundantly diverse beliefs systems are on all manner of topics whether related to religion, law, politics, Trump, evolution, health... you name it. You and I disagree on what is proper US foreign policy too. This is normal and natural. We all think we are right, and I respect someone not because of what they believe but how they treat others. And so far as I've seen Liberator treats others very, very well.

As a proponent of reincarnation, I can empathize a little bit with Liberator's predicament of convincing others of a perceived reality that others don't give the time of day (though there is little to no evidence against reincarnation as -- I contend -- there is in abundance against flat earth).

Thank you again for your respect and integrity and manner in which you routinely conduct our respective exchange of ideas and conversation.

As you note, though we may not agree with one another on points or perspective, there is still value and mutual respect in our exchange as we share respective information. It also takes a patience and consideration that many struggle to have due to lack of interest or time to begin with.

Yes, I concur when you speak of our inherent ability to believe things that are un-true. Or even unlikely, improbable, and...even impossible. How *does* that happen? What processes are involved? Are these opinions developed as a matter of systematic conditioning and imprinting from an early age? Are they developed over time as we process accumulated data? Do we believe what Mom and Dad believed? (ll is true, isn't it?) If not critical to living day to day, how important actually are our "systems of beliefs"?

All challenged dogma -- whether scientific, religious, historical, political, cultural -- WILL naturally be met with visceral emotional objection. That is a given. (This is why we are often warned, "NEVER discuss religion or politics" in a social setting.)

At the periphery of most dogmas however lie some hazy, un-clarified, cloudy areas. Some will declare themselves "Gate Keepers" or "Defenders of the Faith." It is *my* opinion that the most susceptible of these dogmas to challenge is "Science," a definition that literally changes often.

In that way, it could be said that someone believing in a flat earth is not demonstrating anything any more unusual than someone honestly believing socialism would lead to economic utopia for all, or a Muslim jihadist honestly believing that an all powerful God would need help in destroying people who don't believe in Allah.

... Except "Flat Earth" is not a religious or philosophical dogma. It's a theory that at its foundation is the Bible's account of Creation in Genesis (reinforced by several chapters and verses within scripture), supported by circumstantial scientific evidence, observation, and speculation. It can't be dis-proven nor can it be proven.

Well stated and honorable ethic regarding "respect" we'd all do well to learn by.

Your additional observations are patently true; We may well find consensus on some subjects and opinion, partial agreement and quibbling; then full divergence of opinion on other matters.

To be honest, my "Flat Earth" discussion was never intended as a case to convince others of its validity; It has been presented as a case that warrants further (Read: ANY) investigation. It provides a possible alternative reality to explore for the first time as its bits and pieces are considered.

Admittedly, the recent and historical blatant rash of lies and censorship from all manners of governance and its depts, its obvious un-holy "marriage" to Mainstream Media/Social Media, the Academe, together with and coercive bureaucracy had been the facilitator of such exploration and skepticism of previous etched-in-stone government "truths."

As to a belief, the philosophy or theory of reincarnation as a matter of addressing and resolving a system of eternal justice is a compelling concept. I've presume many Christians at one time may have not only examined but considered.

In the final analysis for me personally during the first go-round many years ago, its possibility was examined and back then, those kinds of philosophies and it's various angles were shared and discussed by many.

I'd also taken a solid look as well into Newtonian Model, which is an adjusted model of reincarnation, relying first on deep hypnoses and past life regression as validation of as its underpinnings -- as well as truth as presented.

Imperfect man naturally wants and needs a second chance. Like reincarnation, The Newton Model accommodates in this respect. But maybe its too much of a good thing with little to no downside including an eternally patient "self-salvation." It's short on details, but necessarily so.

The Christ-God model is complete. It indeed *does* give second, third, tenth chances to learn the truth. His Laws. Our Responsibility. Our Free Will. His Judgement.

It begins with explaining Creation, the basis and purpose of life and wisdom, encouragement, the need for salvation outside of ourselves and explanation of attaining this goal, world history, prophecies fulfilled and yet to be fulfilled, and finally the explanation of eternal justice, eternal Salvation, eternal Judgment, and eternal Authority/Arbiter/Creator, and eternal Final Resolution/Home (Heaven/Hell.)

Again, let me reinforce "Flat Earth"; It is NOT a Religion. It is a Theory. Just like all other theories which have NOT been "proven by scientific methods."

The above theories are fully dismissed as "scientifically proven," which IS true.

Heliocentricity is a theory. Evolution is a theory. "Space Travel" is theory. A spherical global is theory. Global Warming is a theory. "Black Holes" are theory. "Outer Space" is theory. The Big Bang" and 13 billion year old universe are theories. NONE are "scientifically" proven.

The above theories are NOT SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN. (should we redefine "Science"?)

We currently are not allowed to independently venture anywhere *near* Antarctica. Air travel is restricted. People are restricted from exploring Antarctica proper.

If no one but international governments, military, and "scientists" are allowed access, we must either rely on said governments for the "truth" of what comprises the 5,000,000 sq mi (and beyond); Rely SOLELY on recent "maps" (ancient mapping displays flat earth); And rely on artists renderings and "satellite" photos) to validate exactly what lies within the interior and beyond of the Antarctica. Fact is, 5 million square miles of ANTARCTICA IS UN-SURVEYED. UN-EXPLORED. UN-DISCUSSED.