The Instigator
Stupidape
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Edlvsjd
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

(Pro) Spherical vs flat Earth (Con)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/27/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,785 times Debate No: 98081
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (56)
Votes (0)

 

Stupidape

Pro

R1 Acceptance & definitions
R2 Arguments
R3 Rebuttals
R4 Defense

Burden of proof will be equally shared.

Neither side has to prove the Earth is perfectly spherical nor flat, only that the Earth's shape is closer to spherical than flat in my case and in my opponent's case that the Earth's shape is closer to flat than spherical.

Use common definitions unless otherwise expressed and agreed upon.

R2 Arguments, don't respond directly, each person makes their case.

R3 Rebuttals, respond directly to opponent's r2 arguments.

R4 Defense, respond directly to opponent's r3 rebuttals.

Thanks in advance.
Edlvsjd

Con

Thanks for the invitation do I grow weary proving the Earth is flat on deaf ears. I am currently researching Giants and silicon-based life and our not-so-distant history. But I never turn down a flat earth debate. I would like to offer some definitions on evidence at out start.

Evidence should be examined with scrutiny. There are two types of evidence, subjective and objective. Below is an explanation with examples of each type.

SUBJECTIVE EVIDENCE is evidence that you cannot evaluate -- you have to simply accept what the person says or reject it.

For example, Fred says "My foot hurts a lot." Is he lying? How much is "a lot"? What is Fred's idea of "pain"? ... a sharp, stabbing pain, or just his foot "fell asleep"?

Harry says "That was a hard test!" Compared to what? Did he study? Is this just a subject he finds particularly difficult?

Bill says "Boy, that was a great football game!" Compared to what? Who was playing? ... his son, the team he coaches, him, two pro teams?

OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE is evidence you can examine and evaluate for yourself.

If Fred walks in with a cane, and a knife stuck in his foot, you can make a decision without hearing Fred's opinion!

If you read the test Harry talked about, you can decide for yourself whether it's hard.

If you see a video of the football game, you might see great plays, high scores, a last-minute win, etc.

Subjective evidence can be useful in a dichotomy, especially when there are several subjective points. However subjective evidence should be secondary to objective evidence. We will find that the majority of the ball earth theory is based on subjective material, while just the opposite holds true for flat earth evidence. When the evidence for spherical earth is not subjective, that evidence is often inconclusive, completely unrelated or simply misunderstood phenomena.
Debate Round No. 1
Stupidape

Pro

Round two arguments


I reject my opponent's definitions. No explanation is needed due to the round one setup protocol.

"Use common definitions unless otherwise expressed and agreed upon. " Stupidape

Nevertheless, I did explain why in the comments.


I. Moon

We have evidence for a long time the Earth is spherical in shape. [0] The shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse shows Earth's shadow, as round. The moon is round, thus the Earth is round.

Due to the rotations of the moon and Earth, we can see different black spots on the moon, showing that the moon is not only round but spherical and thus the Earth is also spherical.

"The largest dark spot on the moon, known as the Ocean of Storms, may be a scar from a giant cosmic impact that created a magma sea more than a thousand miles wide and several hundred miles deep, researchers say." [1]


II. Other celestial bodies are spherical in shape

It is common knowledge that most other heavenly bodies are spherical in shape. The sun, moon, other planets, asteroids, and comets. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume the Earth is spherical in shape also. This provides indirect supporting evidence that the Earth is spherical in shape.


III. Ships and the horizon


Ships on the horizon appear to emerge from the sea. Showing the curvature of the Earth and thus spherical.

"If you stand on the seashore and watch a ship sailing away, it will gradually disappear from view. But the reason cannot be the distance: if a hill or tower are nearby, and you climb to the top after the ship has completely disappeared, it becomes visible again. Furthermore, if on the shore you watch carefully the way the ship disappears from view, you will notice that the hull vanishes first, while the masts and sails (or the bridge and smokestack) disappear last. It is as if the ship was dropping behind a hill, which in a way is exactly the case, the "hill" being the curve of the Earth's surface. " [2]


IV. Magellan's voyage


Magellan circumvented the globe, thus proving the world can't possibly be flat in those directions. Note, it might be possible for the Earth to still be flat at the North and South poles. This provides supporting evidence by limiting the possibilities where the Earth could be flat, and proving the Earth must be round from West to East, despite failing to prove round from North to South.


V. Planes circumventing the globe


Many planes have circumvented the globe. Proving the globe must be round in those directions. This provides additional supporting evidence for the previous statement. Again, it is unknown whether any planes have circumvented the globe from North to South due to the extremely harsh climate of the south pole.


VI. Photos from space

Photos from space illustrate the Earth is spherical in shape. [3]


VII. Astronauts


Astronauts have viewed Earth from space and the moon and come back to tell the tale.

VIII. Rotation of the Earth


The reason the Earth is not a perfect sphere is due to the spinning of the Earth. "Moreover, to even out Earth's imbalanced distribution of mass and stabilize its spin, "the entire surface of the Earth will rotate and try to redistribute mass along the equator, a process called true polar wander," Meert says." [4]

Thus the Earth cannot be flat. Even if some event caused the Earth to become flat, the Earth would revert into roughly a sphere.


IX. Formation of the Earth

Here is one scientific theory of how the Earth was formed. " The core accretion model

Approximately 4.6 billion years ago, the solar system was a cloud of dust and gas known as a solar nebula. Gravity collapsed the material in on itself as it began to spin, forming the sun in the center of the nebula.

With the rise of the sun, the remaining material began to clump up. Small particles drew together, bound by the force of gravity, into larger particles. The solar wind swept away lighter elements, such as hydrogen and helium, from the closer regions, leaving only heavy, rocky materials to create smaller terrestrial worlds like Earth. But farther away, the solar winds had less impact on lighter elements, allowing them to coalesce into gas giants. In this way, asteroids, comets, planets, and moons were created.

Earth's rocky core formed first, with heavy elements colliding and binding together. Dense material sank to the center, while the lighter material created the crust. The planet's magnetic field probably formed around this time. Gravity captured some of the gases that made up the planet's early atmosphere.

Early in its evolution, Earth suffered an impact by a large body that catapulted pieces of the young planet's mantle into space. Gravity caused many of these pieces to draw together and form the moon, which took up orbit around its creator." [5]

The Earth was formed spherical and the rotations of the Earth keep the Earth spherical in shape. Despite, there being multiple theories, each theory supports the idea of a spherical Earth, thus to prove a flat Earth my opponent would have to at the least disprove all the scientific theories on how the Earth was formed.


X. Conclusions


I have proven in multiple ways the Earth is round and spherical in shape. A weak argument could be made for the Earth being a disc in shape and an extremely weak argument could be made for the Earth being rectangular or square in shape.

The rectangular or square in shape is defeated by the shadow of the moon and Greek ships hiding behind the Earth's curvature alone. Proving the Earth is a sphere as opposed to a disc is more difficult. Yet, due to the rotations of the moon and Earth we can see the dark spots on the moon at different angles showing the Earth is spherical as opposed to a disc.

The other celestial bodies being spherical in shape combined with gravity rotating these celestial bodies into spheres proves the Earth is spherical. The photographs, astronauts, Magellan's voyage, and aircraft circumventing the globe limit where the Earth could be flat to only a few locations, the north and south pole. My opponent would have to then explain why the Earth is flat in these locations and not others, as well as proving the Earth is flat at the two poles.

Finally, I expect my opponent to use a faith based argument at some point. The Koran is the Islamic religion's version of the Holy Bible. The Koran clearly states the Earth is spherical in shape. Therefore, my opponent would have to prove his/her faith based argument is superior to that of the Koran.


" Allah Almighty in one Word said that He made the earth as an egg. We all know today that earth is spherical and science did confirm that the earth is indeed egg-shaped." [6]

Thanks for debating.

Sources
0. http://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov...
1. http://www.space.com...
2. http://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov...
3. https://images.duckduckgo.com...
4. http://www.scientificamerican.com...
5. http://www.space.com...
6. http://www.answering-christianity.com...
Edlvsjd

Con

Contention one.

Anyone who celebrates Christmas can verify this. Have a look at the glass balls on your tree this year, most of us have them up right now, so have no excuse not to perform this simple, empirical experiment. Take a glass ball and make a right triangle with the observers eye at A, the ball at B, and a light source at C. (1) This is where we are in relation to the sun at the time of sunset.(6) Do you see the light reflected in the ball? Of course not! This is because spherical objects, or convex surfaces produce a specular reflection, whereas it points back to the source. (2,3) Not only that, but the reflection of the source appears smaller. This is why the give you that little warning on your side mirrors in the car. Sure you might can cheat a little with the relative distances and angles, and you might even get a hint of the reflection, but you'll never be able to reproduce this image. (4) Water is highly reflective, just like glass, or sheet metal. So let's try to reproduce this image with these reflective materials. Hold a flattened piece of sheet metal or like material up to the eye, and point the other end, as if you were aiming a rifle, up to a light source. The results are very much like the sunset. (5) We now have an empirically experimentally (objective) proof that the earth is flat.

Contention two: The Chicago Skyline

Joshua Nowicki has been photographing the Chicago skyline for a few years now. This would be impossible if he were doing so on a ball that is 25,000 miles in circumference. (7) Modern science tells us that this is a mirage, but again, anyone who's actually seen a mirage, superior or otherwise, will agree that mirages are just "reflections" most of the time they are greatly distorted, and always upside down. Granted, visibility factors such as atmospheric blocking and waves and swellls on lake Michigan sometimes do not grant this sight always, but the skyline is seen on a regular basis. (9) This isn't the only instance of people being able to see further than they should, in fact, people are recently testing the globe, and the flatness of water to see landmarks that should be well over the curvature of the earth, and every time this test is done, no curvature can be found. This can be done easily if there is a fairly large body of water near you. All you need is a decent camera and the earth curvature calculator(10). This is yet another (objective) empirical proof that the earth is flat.

Contention three: Gyroscopes

Definition from Wikipedia: "A gyroscope, not to be confused with gyrocompass, is a spinning wheel mounted on a gimbal so that the wheel's axis is free to orient itself in any way. When it is spun up to speed with its axis pointing in some direction, due to the law of conservation of angular momentum, such a wheel will normally maintain its original orientation to a fixed point in outer space (not to a fixed point on Earth). Since our planet rotates, it appears to a stationary observer on Earth that a gyroscope's axis is completing a full rotation once every 24 hours." (11) Anyone who has ever owned a gyroscope can verify that they do verify that they do very curious things, even seemingly defying "gravity" sometimes. This experiment show both that the earth is NOT rotating, and can't be a ball. Gyroscopes have been spun up for hours at a time, and not even the slightest of rotations can be observed. (12) Attitude indicators operate by use of a basic gyroscope. (13) If the earth were a ball, spinning, wobbling, going around the sun, which is bolting around our galaxy, that is rocketing around the universe at a combined rate of about 1,000 miles per second, they would be virtually useless, especially on transcontinental flights. Some higher end smart phones are equipped with a built in gyroscope. If yours has one, download any decent pitch indicator, and leave it on your night stand when you go to bed. Wake up in the morning and see for yourself that the phone has not moved or changed it's angle the entire time. Since your average person can get a good gyro and produce these same results, this is another (objective) empirically experimental proof that the earth is flat.

1. https://upload.wikimedia.org...
2. https://www.scratchapixel.com...
3. http://www.laurelleaffarm.com...
4. https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...
5. http://www.debate.org...
6. https://upload.wikimedia.org...
7. https://youtu.be...
8. http://aty.sdsu.edu...
9.https://joshuanowicki.smugmug.com...
10. https://dizzib.github.io...
11. https://en.m.wikipedia.org...
12. https://youtu.be...
13. https://youtu.be...
Debate Round No. 2
Stupidape

Pro

Round three Rebuttals


I openly admit I cannot fully comprehend my opponent's argument, nor will I be able to within the 72 hours time frame. Nevertheless, I will rebut my opponent's argument to the best of my ability.


"Anyone who celebrates Christmas can verify this." Edlvsjd


Just because anyone can perform the experiment doesn't mean the experiment impacts the resolution. Thus, this experiment is assumed to be a red herring until proven otherwise. [7]


"Exposition:

This is the most general fallacy of irrelevance. Any argument in which the premisses are logically unrelated to the conclusion commits this fallacy. " [7]


"We now have an empirically experimentally (objective) proof that the earth is flat." Edlvsjd


You make bold claims, without adequately clarifying how this proves the Earth is flat. At best, this provides supporting evidence. At worst, it is simply a red herring.


The Chicago Skyline


You can see very tall buildings in the picture. [8] This is also my profile picture in case the photo fails to load.

Stupidape

This is to be expected. If you place a common object on top of a hill and a duplicate of the same object on lower ground, you will be able to see the object on top of the hill from further away. Same with tall objects, if you have a 50 foot high pole next to a 5 foot high pole, you should be able to see the 50 foot high pole from further away.

Even, if you are correct in your assessment, this does not prove a flat Earth, this is only evidence. I also supplied plenty of evidence in my round two argument. Finally, by your own logic, not everyone can afford a decent camera. There are many people in the world who can't reasonable perform this experiment personally.


Gyroscopes


Gyroscopes provide supporting evidence for a spherical Earth. Otherwise, gyroscopes wouldn't be used in planes. Furthermore gyroscopes are used by NASA in space. [9] Not that I understand this material, but here's how gyroscopes work in airplanes.

"A Horizontal gyro at the North Pole shows an apparent drift of 15° per hour as the earth rotates under it. " [10]

So I question, why would one experiment point towards a flat Earth and another towards a sherical Earth? I think my opponent cherry picked the evidence that would support his/her claim.

"When only select evidence is presented in order to persuade the audience to accept a position, and evidence that would go against the position is withheld. The stronger the withheld evidence, the more fallacious the argument." [11]


Sources
7. http://www.fallacyfiles.org...
8. https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com...
9. https://science.nasa.gov...
10. http://www.theairlinepilots.com...
11. https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...
Edlvsjd

Con

R1 moon

"The shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse shows Earth's shadow, as round. The moon is round, thus the Earth is round."

Many instances have been recorded of lunar eclipses happening when both the sun and moon were above the horizon. They call them selenelions. This would be impossible if the earth were directly in line between the sun and moon.

https://youtu.be...

Aside from that, objects in the sky and their shapes are irrelevant to the conclusion. Thus, this observation is assumed to be a red herring until lroven otherwise.

Other celestial bodies are spherical. ..

This observation does not impact the resolution. Thus, this experiment is assumed to be a red herring until proven otherwise. It is very similar to saying that since the billiard balls are spherical, so then must be the table.

Ships and the horizon

This is the reason Aristotle postulated the earth was a ball in Ancient Greece, but this was before the time of binoculars and other telescopic devices. Next time you go to the beach, bring some binoculars with you. Start watching the ship when you can still see it, and after some time, yes, the ship does appear to start dropping below the horizon, but, this is only an illusion. Pull out your binos and magically drag the ship backwards over the curvature of the earth! Bring a telescope to make it come back twice!

http://youtu.be...

Magellan and planes circumnavigation

The flat earth, or at least the parts we know about, is circular, with the north pole at it's center, circumnavigation just means going in a giant circle around the north pole, the fact that no one can circumnavigate from north to south is evidence of this. The map is the azimuthal equidistant map for future reference.

Photos from space.

Notice the grey striped in that image? This isbecause NASA has not taken a real photograph of earth since the original lunar landing. All but that image are composites, which is data taken from several satellite scans, stitched together in Photoshop. The lunar landing photo is presumed a fake also, due to this video of those astronauts faking these pictures.

https://youtu.be...

Since it has been proven that NASA is an unreliable source, I strongly urge voters to be skeptical of any information from that source.

Which leads us to astronauts' word, which is aneqdotal, and, when examining the body language of the astronauts in the press conference after the landing, appears to be rehearsed, and even forced.

https://youtu.be...

Rotation of the earth.

The earth has not moved an inch since God created it. Furthermore, if mass has been accumulated at the equator as my opponent claims, since liquid is more readily moved than land, the entire equator would be void of land mass. The Michelson Morley experiment proved lack of motion, as did Aireys failure. Due to the former experiments unbelievable results, Einstein was quoted saying : "Since then I have come to believe that the motion of the Earth cannot be detected by any optical experiment"

http://photontheory.com...

Formation of the earth

"my opponent would have to at the least disprove all the scientific theories on how the Earth was formed."

This is an asanine statement. The theories are based on the assumption that the earth is a ball, or assuming the resolution. The argument should be dismissed as fallacious. There's a better creation story, and modern science is hiding it in front of your face.

Conclusion
What hasn't been refuted already is mention of the Koran, and the shape of the earth.

" Therefore, my opponent would have to prove his/her faith based argument is superior to that of the Koran. "

This is not a religious debate, nor do I choose to make it so. Although I must speculate, because I have not seen the earth as a whole, nor have I been to the farthest reaches of it, I feel that the earth overall is an infinite plane. The ice extends well past Antarctica, as hinted by admiral Byrd's accounts for his journey "past the south pole". The egg shape my opponent and the Koran could be metaphorical for round, which I support, a flat, round earth. Like a pizza, or a coin. This is the portion of the earth we have access to, what is beyond Antarcticacan only be speculated. Furthermore a dome or firmament covering the earth could cause it to have an "egg shape" from a distance, but this is another debate altogether.

"Just because anyone can perform the experiment doesn't mean the experiment impacts the resolution. Thus, this experiment is assumed to be a red herring until proven otherwise."

The experiment is valid, and very relevant. Reflections of light off of water and other reflective materials can be valid in any other experiment, is scaleable, reproduceable, falsifiable, and my opponent's apparent misunderstanding is likely an attempted dodge, since he not shown how or what invalidates the experiment.

"clarifying how this proves the Earth is flat. "

Reflections of light off of a ball, and a flat surface produce very different results. We see the reflection like that of a flat surface instead of that of a ball. Hopefully the voters will understand this very simple demonstration, and recognize a dodge when they see one.

My opponent has admitted in the comments section that he has no idea how much the earth should curve out- and downward in any direction over a given distance in order to be a ball that is 25,000 miles in circumference. He doesn't seem to think that it would be impossible to see the Chicago skyline from Michigan. The distance as the crow flies from Chicago to Michigan is 57 miles. The formula for calculating the supposed curvature for theball earth is easy, and has been verified in CAD programs.
8in.(distance in miles^2)
http://static.wixstatic.com...

8in. (57^2) = 25,992in.converted to feet 25,992/12=2,166 feet should be hidden from view. The tallest building in Chicago is a mere 1,450 feet, even that should be hidden from view, but as you can see most of the buildings in Chicago from Michigan, it stands that there is no curve over lake Michigan for 57 miles, where there should be much.

Gyroscopes

"Gyroscopes provide supporting evidence for a spherical Earth. Otherwise, gyroscopes wouldn't be used in planes"

My opponent ignore my experiments and logic and claims that they support the globe. The truth is, he simply does not understand. Gyroscopes stay in a fixed position and angle from when they are spun up. The experiment has been done multiple times, and they never moved an inch. As the earth rotates under the gyroscope, we may not notice the earth spin, but the gyroscope should roll backwards opposite the spin. My opponent's offer of a forum post claiming that they will does not hold water. Had he presented an actual experiment verifying this (I looked for one) the rebuttal would have been more sound. Airplanes are outfitted with a simple mechanical gyroscope, allowing the pilot to see which way is up in a single glance. If pilots were flying over a curved surface that is spinning, revolving around the sun, which is revolving around the galaxy, which is rocketing across the universe, gyroscopes would likely go in all manner of directions and tilts. The fact that they are reliable on transcontinental flights, and remain in one position for hours of time supports my claim that we haven't moved an inch,and the curve of the earth, nor the supposed motions do not exist at all.

Thanks for debating.
Debate Round No. 3
Stupidape

Pro

R4 Defense


"Many instances have been recorded of lunar eclipses happening when both the sun and moon were above the horizon. They call them selenelions. This would be impossible if the earth were directly in line between the sun and moon." Edlvsjd


Alright, I've never heard of a selenelions before, but here goes anyways.


" When you consider that the sun and the moon are on precisely opposite sides of our planet during a lunar eclipse, it may seem geometrically impossible for an earthly observer to see both celestial bodies at the same time. However, the refraction effect means light can be bent enough to place the sun on one side of the sky, and the darkened moon on the other.

This effect is known as selenelion — pronounced "sell-a-NELL-ion," to rhyme with "hellion" (though "sell-a-NEEL-ion" may be an alternate). To see it, you have to be at just the right place at the right time. For Americans, that's when the moon is setting and the sun is rising. " [12]


As you can see this is a rare occurrence that involves an optical illusion. Which is also seen with many other flat Earth arguments in this video. [13] A set of cheap conjurer's toys to the rational mind.


"Other celestial bodies are spherical. ..

This observation does not impact the resolution. Thus, this experiment is assumed to be a red herring until proven otherwise. It is very similar to saying that since the billiard balls are spherical, so then must be the table." Edlvsjd


This is a bad analogy fallacy.


"also known as: bad analogy, false analogy, faulty analogy, questionable analogy, argument from spurious similarity, false metaphor)

Description: When an analogy is used to prove or disprove an argument, but the analogy is too dissimilar to be effective, that is, it is unlike the argument more than it is like the argument."[14]


The problem with the billiard balls compared to table analogy is the table is so dissimilar that the analogy is ineffective. A better analogy would be comparing the white billiard ball to the other balls. Looking at the other billiard balls they are spherical, therefore it is safe to assume that the white billiard ball is spherical, without directly looking at or feeling the white billiard ball.


"Ships and the horizon

This is the reason Aristotle postulated the earth was a ball in Ancient Greece, but this was before the time of binoculars and other telescopic devices. Next time you go to the beach, bring some binoculars with you. Start watching the ship when you can still see it, and after some time, yes, the ship does appear to start dropping below the horizon, but, this is only an illusion. Pull out your binos and magically drag the ship backwards over the curvature of the earth! Bring a telescope to make it come back twice!" Edlvsjd


The problem is that you may not have performed the experiment correctly. So, I can grab a binoculars and watch a tiny boat disappear and then reappear when I zoom in somewhat. Then, watch it disappear again, and zoom in more and watch it reappear. What does that prove?

All this proves is vanishing points, then when an object is too far away we can no longer view the object. This is not the same as the Earth's curvature. If the boat disappearing from view was a vanishing point, the entire boat would disappear at once rather than the hull first and the sails last. [15]

Watch this video to see what is wrong with the sail boat argument. [13] Finally, if you watch the video provided by my opponent to the end, you see the sail slowly sinking behind the horizon, just as expect even with the telescope.


"Magellan and planes circumnavigation

The flat earth, or at least the parts we know about, is circular, with the north pole at it's center, circumnavigation just means going in a giant circle around the north pole, the fact that no one can circumnavigate from north to south is evidence of this. The map is the azimuthal equidistant map for future reference." Edlvsjd


This is only evidence of severe weather. There is not too many harbors nor airports in those temperatures.


"Photos from space." Edlvsjd


There are many counter arguments to the photos from space. An entire debate could be devoted to this subject. Here are a few websites that think the Earth photos were legitimate. Nation geographic, snopes, rationalwiki, and entire forty four minute long documentary. [16][17][18]


"Given the overall context of the moon landings and that of the Space Race with the Soviet Union, there are many, many reasons why people would come forward to conclusively prove that the landings were faked: political gain, monetary gain, pure fame, and so on. Disproving the landings by a first-hand account, or evidence (such as a sneaky photograph of the studio used or something more concrete) would be relatively simple. However, this still flies in the face of what is known. Man-made objects are still on the moon and transmissions came from the moon, there is no "faking" this.[45]" [19]


These conapricy theories fail to take into account man-made objects and transmissions from the moon. Too many people would have to bribed or silenced. Overall, the difficuty of pulling off this conspiracy is greater than landing on the moon.


"Rotation of the earth.

The earth has not moved an inch since God created it." Edlvsjd

Which God? How would God come into existence anyways? Since the creator must be more sophisticated than the creation this leads to the problem of infinite regressions. The idea of God creates more questions than answers.


"Furthermore, if mass has been accumulated at the equator as my opponent claims, since liquid is more readily moved than land, the entire equator would be void of land mass. " Edlvsjd


There is also more heat at the equator to evaporate said liquid.


"The Michelson Morley experiment proved lack of motion, as did Aireys failure. Due to the former experiments unbelievable results, Einstein was quoted saying : "Since then I have come to believe that the motion of the Earth cannot be detected by any optical experiment"" Edlvsjd


A lack of evidence is not proof of non-existence. Otherwise, God would have been dis-proven a long time ago.


"This is an asanine statement. The theories are based on the assumption that the earth is a ball, or assuming the resolution. The argument should be dismissed as fallacious. There's a better creation story, and modern science is hiding it in front of your face." Edlvsjd


How do you know those theories are based upon the assumption the Earth is a ball? My opponent hides behind the God argument again.


"The egg shape my opponent and the Koran could be metaphorical for round, which I support, a flat, round earth. " Edlvsjd


There is many ways to interpet religious scriptures. This could be metaphorical, but neverthless I've haven't seen any flat, healthy, whole, and untouched by humans eggs.


I will end here. My opponent continues with a violation of the round structure. I cannot respond without breaking the rules myself and turning into a hypocrite. My opponent has posted a defense that should be saved for round 4. This is only a minor violation, I suggest just reposting this in round 4.


""Just because anyone can perform the experiment doesn't mean the experiment impacts the resolution. Thus, this experiment is assumed to be a red herring until proven otherwise."" Edlvsjd


Thanks for the read.

Sources
12. http://www.nbcnews.com...
13. https://www.youtube.com...
14. https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...
15. http://drawsketch.about.com...
16. http://news.nationalgeographic.com...
17. http://www.snopes.com...
18. http://topdocumentaryfilms.com...
19. http://rationalwiki.org...
Edlvsjd

Con

Apologies to my opponent for not thoroughly reading his specific rules of this debate. In light of this violation, however minor he claims, I've chosen to forfeit the final round as he suggests. I hope that after this debate, he not only reconsider the idea that the spherical earth theory is fact, but that he starts his own research, and compare the evidence with an unbiased, critical eye. Most intelligent debaters I've faced have either disappeared from DDO, or are still in private conversation with me about it. I encourage him to do the same. I suggest he watch a basic FAQ on the theory, and a few starter videos to clear up the many misconceptions that come with it. I wish him a happy new year, and a prosperous and eye opening 2017.
Debate Round No. 4
56 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Edlvsjd 1 year ago
Edlvsjd
Flat Earth Evidence: http://www.youtube.com...
Posted by Stupidape 1 year ago
Stupidape
I'll keep in contact, I'll need a good 72 hours just to process the debate.
Posted by Stupidape 1 year ago
Stupidape
I gotta work on my r4 argument, I will not respond further until after I have posted my r4.
Posted by Stupidape 1 year ago
Stupidape
I'm not even sure if subliminal messages work. Second, I never read those words with the national anthem. I would have to get video editing software to advance the video frame by frame to verify this.
Posted by Edlvsjd 1 year ago
Edlvsjd
https://youtu.be...

Turn it off more, it's hard for some people, I meditated to help.
Posted by Edlvsjd 1 year ago
Edlvsjd
How long is your tv on a day?
Posted by Edlvsjd 1 year ago
Edlvsjd
I'll be willing to bet someone like you, after you're done researching unbiased both theories, you could win some flat earth debates. I didn't like it either and it's a very long story, but you will either have to empirically see the proof yourself, or figure out the world is a stage first. You remember when TV went off the air at night, and they played the national anthem?
Posted by Stupidape 1 year ago
Stupidape
"Have you heard of MKULTRA?"

Not until you just mentioned that. What does it stand for?
Posted by Edlvsjd 1 year ago
Edlvsjd
"library of Alexandria it burnt "

https://ehistory.osu.edu...

Do you look at the telivision?
Posted by Edlvsjd 1 year ago
Edlvsjd
Have you heard of MKULTRA?
No votes have been placed for this debate.