The Instigator
lannan13
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
MissLenaElan
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Resolved: The Earth is flat.

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: 5/3/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,992 times Debate No: 74477
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (29)
Votes (0)

 

lannan13

Pro

This debate is impossible to accept. If you wish to accept please say so in the comments section. Note that I don't actually believe this, I just find it fun to debate.

Definitions:

Spherical: shaped like a sphere (1)
Flat-having a wide, smooth surface and little thickness (http://www.merriam-webster.com...)
If my opponent disputes this definition then he can do so in the comments section before round 2, I will then evaluate the contention.

Structure
Round 1: Acceptance & terms/definitions
Round 2: Opening argument(s)
Round 3: Rebuttals
Round 4: Final rebuttals and closing statements
No profanity.
No trolling.

I look forward to a great debate!

(1) Google: 'Define spherical'
MissLenaElan

Con

I accept.

One more definition:
Earth: the planet on which we live; the world.
From Google

This should be fun, thank you for the challenge!
Debate Round No. 1
lannan13

Pro

Okay so let's get down to some crazy things for this wounderous debate.
So to clarify I will be debating that the Earth is flat by using the Neo-Classical Model with the following descripition.
  1. The earth is finite disk.
  2. The earth is being accelerate upwards at approximately 9.80665 m/s2.
  3. The earth is the only known "disk" in the universe.
  4. The laws of physics are the same in every inertial reference frame.
  5. The speed of light, measured in any inertial reference frame, always has the same value, c. (http://wiki.tfes.org...)
Contention 1: Rotation of sun and the seasons.
Day/night cycle on a Flat Earth
One of the greatest questions you have right now is probably if the Earth is flat how does day and night work. Well the answer is actually that the Sun and the moon rotate around the Earth in a circular motion. As seen in the gif that I've provided above you can painly see that ti's a spotlight type roation as it rotates around the Earth illuminating only a certain portion of the Earth at a time simulating both night and day.



Here we can the if we were a photon that the Earth would shrink to ironically the same thickness that I have previously described. Here is a simulator that shows the exact same thing. (http://demonstrations.wolfram.com...)
Seasons in Flat Earth Theory
Seasons are explained above. As the Sun moves closer to the poles it becomes colder in the northern hemisphere while when the Sun is closer to the equatro it is actually summer time. (http://wiki.tfes.org...)
If we use the above model we can see that the Earth is indeed the center of the Universe. Though the other planets may orbit the sun we can see that the sun and the rest of the solar system orbits around the Earth.
Further proof that the Earth is flat is when we observe cosmic rays and that they travel the speed of light. Now if we look at the simulator that I have provided you we can see that as things approach the speed of light they are flattend. (http://demonstrations.wolfram.com...) Cosmic rays called Muans are better known to collide in our atmosphere and we shouldn't be recieving barely any, however we get a whole lot more then expected, but since they're going so fast the Earth is flatter and the distance they have to cover is a whole lot closer. If you were a proton moving 99.999999% the speed of light you can see that the Earth would only appear to be 17 meters thick.
Contention 2: Gravity

Now before you jump to several statements that Gravity should collapse the Earth into a sphere there is just one problem with that. Gravity doesn't exist. How in the world is this you may ask. Well you can see that the Earth is actually accelerating up at the acceration of 9.88 meters per second. This explains Newton's gravitationial theory, but Newton was incorrect here. (http://wiki.tfes.org...) With the increased accerlation it becomes apparent that this also causes you to be shorter at the end of the day. Now to further this I would like to clarify that gravitation, not gravity exists. This explains the tides as stars and the moon/other celestial bodies all have slight gravitationial pull.
Here is a list on how they are different in order to clarify the debate up a tad bit.

- Gravity or the gravitational field is a vector field, while gravitational force is only a vector.

- Gravity lies in the radial direction from the mass, while gravitational force is in the direction of the line connecting the two masses.

- Gravitational field requires only one mass, while two masses are required for gravitational force.

- Gravitational force is equal to the product of the mass of the test object and the gravitational field intensity. (http://www.differencebetween.com...)

Now I want you to imagin living on this Earth, which as I showed earlier is just a flat disk. The gravitational force is actually angled to the point to where as you get further and further away from the center (the north pole) you can see that the increasing gravitationial force would cause you to want to fall back towards the center and not want to go towards the edge of the Earth. The people living away from the north pole would have their living conditions inclined in order to meet such a force. It would feel like you are trying to clime up a steeper and steeper hill. Contary to belief you wouldn't fall off the edge due to the gravitationial vector pointing back towards the north pole, the actual fear would be falling off the edge and rolling back towards the center as shown in the picture above.

That is all for my opening arguments and my rebuttles shall come in the next round as requested by my opponent.

MissLenaElan

Con

MissLenaElan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
lannan13

Pro

All points extended.
MissLenaElan

Con

I am so sorry for the forfeit and the lateness of this argument. I understand how pointless it can make a debate seem, however I really like this one. Thank you for the extension.

To start with my opening argument, I will use your definition of 'flat.' I agree that the surface is wide, however, it is far from smooth. Because our world is three dimensional, things clearly stick out of the ground, such as the house or apartment you live in[2]. The earth definitely does not have little thickness, either. In fact, it is more than 4,000 miles deep[1]! This would also mean mountains and earthquakes would be unable to form[7]. Your definition of flat does not fit the earth. However, it is a lot closer to being spherical. From satellite images, we see the earth as a circle{1}. We can also see different countries on the earth depending on the angle, while the circle does not change size{2}. That would bring us to the logical conclusion that it must instead be a sphere.

Rebuttals:
If we lived on the flat side of the earth's circle, and not the curved edge, your explanation of the sun and moon's rotation would not hold up. Instead of the sun appearing to rise one way and set the other, it would seem to appear already in the sky and slowly rotate in one direction. It would be the same way with the moon. They would ever cross the center of the earth without having no sun at all for the rest of the planet either, and would completely invalidate our system of time[3] and make day and night nonexistent. This model also causes problems with the rest of our solar system. We have proven that the planets rotate around the sun[4]. If the sun rotated around the earth instead, the other planets would not have the same days of their own[5].

"Further proof that the Earth is flat is when we observe cosmic rays and that they travel the speed of light. Now if we look at the simulator that I have provided you we can see that as things approach the speed of light they are flattend. Cosmic rays called Muans are better known to collide in our atmosphere and we shouldn't be recieving barely any, however we get a whole lot more then expected, but since they're going so fast the Earth is flatter and the distance they have to cover is a whole lot closer. If you were a proton moving 99.999999% the speed of light you can see that the Earth would only appear to be 17 meters thick."

That paragraph made little sense grammatically, but I think I understood the point. If I were zooming past earth at the speed of light, I of course would see nothing as our eyes can't process things that fast[6]. If your idea for gravity were true, then the water in the oceans would be forced off the planet because it is not contained.

Sources:
[1] http://www.livescience.com...
[2] http://www.universetoday.com...
[3] http://www.badastronomy.com...
[4] http://csep10.phys.utk.edu...
[5] http://www.telescope.org...
[6] http://www.sciencedirect.com...
[7] http://www.sciencedirect.com...

Images:
{1} https://www.google.com...
{2} https://www.google.com...

Thank you, and again, I apologize. This was fun to research.
Debate Round No. 3
lannan13

Pro

lannan13 forfeited this round.
MissLenaElan

Con

My closing statement is that we have known for years the earth is not flat. It's like arguing that Barack Obama is Satan.
Debate Round No. 4
29 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
Do you want to do a redo?
Posted by MissLenaElan 1 year ago
MissLenaElan
It's fine, I've done it too :)
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
OMG, I'm so sorry.
Posted by MissLenaElan 1 year ago
MissLenaElan
So sorry for the forfeit, thank you for the extension. I've been a little busy, but I will do my best to give some good new points.
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
Glitch.
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
Darn ... every time I see one of these debates, I think the instigator is gonna present some awfully complex and strong arguments. Then I see that they are arguments that I could refute. I could've accepted this =(
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
Darn ... every time I see one of these debates, I think the instigator is gonna present some awfully complex and strong arguments. Then I see that they are arguments that I could refute. I could've accepted this =(
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
Darn ... every time I see one of these debates, I think the instigator is gonna present some awfully complex and strong arguments. Then I see that they are arguments that I could refute. I could've accepted this =(
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
Darn ... every time I see one of these debates, I think the instigator is gonna present some awfully complex and strong arguments. Then I see that they are arguments that I could refute. I could've accepted this =(
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
Darn ... every time I see one of these debates, I think the instigator is gonna present some awfully complex and strong arguments. Then I see that they are arguments that I could refute. I could've accepted this =(
No votes have been placed for this debate.