The earth is flat
Debate Rounds (5)
The earth is flat. I have researched the subject for 6 months now, and there are more proof on the side of a flat earth then I can find on a spherical one. The debate format shall be as follows. Round one is acceptance. In round 2, I state my argument, and con can either use this round for rebuttal or state arguments against the flat earth. Round 3 is for rerebuttals, and further arguments, if possible. Round 4 is strictly for the bottles and round 5 should be used for conclusion and further rebuttals but no new arguments in the last round. Please respect your opponents many sources and media may be used in your argument till that source is proven unreliable or the media is shown to be faked or false. Good luck, I hope to provide insight as well as receive it. I do ask that anyone accepting this debate please have a look at least at the flat earth theory before accepting and arguing against it as it has become redundant arguing the same 10 or so proves that the earth is a sphere. It is not required but makes for a better debate for the both of us. I also ask that theoretical math equations be excluded from the arguments, as they will confuse voters, though not to be confused with basic math as in Pythagoras theorem, and the like. https://en.m.wikipedia.org...
Best of luck to you.
As a student, I'm sure you'll agree the globe heliocentric model has been drilled into your head since as far as you can remember. Pictures of the globe have been presented to you in textbooks, television programs(ever wonder why they call it television programming?) and on the covers of dictionaries and encyclopedias. This is the very definition of indoctrination. You or I have never seen the earth in it's entirety, neither has your teacher. In fact, only a handful of people claim to have been far enough away to see this. I ask you, can pictures be doctored? Can humans lie? It is not my aim to convince you that you have been deceived, I do however, want to encourage you to do the research yourself, and bring about a few questions you probably never knew you had. In this debate, I will talk about coincidences and things that don't make sense about the story given to us. I also want you to know that the establishment has already thought of a lot of this, and provided reasonable, though questionable explanation or lies for most of these questions, it is ultimately up to you, and our voters to decide whether to trust your own senses, or believe what government sources tell us who have a crappy track record of truthfulness so far.
I want to state a few proofs that the earth is a globe. I'll start with some obvious ones that you probably never even thought of, then advance to more definite, undeniable ones. First consider this, why were we never taught the curvature of the earth? We see the flatness everywhere. Go to the beach, look to the horizon, flat. They tell you it's because of the earth size that we can't see any curvature, often using comparisons like a germ on a bowling ball. But what they don't tell you is that the curvature of a ball that is 25,000 miles in circumference SHOULD in fact have a very noticeable curve. As I'm sure you have or will do now, a Google search provides a reasonably small amount of curvature for a mile, but further investigation provides a chart not unlike the one below. The second mile will square, and will square every mile thereafter. So, the ground or sea 2 miles away will be 32" downhill from you.
As you can see, the curvature would be noticeable. From Hawaii tI the California coast for example, at roughly 2,500 miles, would have a hump of water over 700 miles high. Have you ever seen water rest in a humped form? Have you ever, while looking at a sunset, and the horizon being miles away, thought that The sun were beneath your feet? This is what they are teaching us. The basic physics of water is to find and maintain a flat, level surface. This is common sense. The horizon always appears flat, and at eye level, no matter the altitude. If you rise up from any size ball, the horizon would drop, and you would soon be looking down more and more as you rose in altitude. I'm sure you are familiar with fisheye lenses, if not, take some time and look it up. Most high altitude balloon and rocket launches use this type of lens. I'm short, it will curve any line that's not centered. You will know you are looking through a fish eye lens when the horizon is centered, and below the center, when it makes the earth curve outward. This morphing effect is a telltale sign of a fish eye lens. No one pays attention anymore, because we are so brainwashed from indoctrination, and do not even consider an alternative. This video is shot using two cameras, I'll let you use this information figure out which is which. https://youtu.be...
Air travel would be a lot different if we were living on a ball 25000 miles in circumference. Planes would have to constantly check their nose down in order not to fly straight off into space, I know this is theoretically impossible because planes do not have the trust to escape the earth so called gravity. But as you may know, planes fly level with the horizon on both axis is for hundreds, often thousands of miles. As a matter of fact, we would not even need airplanes. If you are on a ball spinning a thousand miles per hour as modern astronomy claims, you would only have to leave the earth maybe in a balloon or the like, fly a little north or south depending on which hemisphere you were flying to, then wait for your destination to arrive under you, provided you could hit a thousand miles per hour moving target or runway, coming in at all angles.
Another proof I want to bring up takes a little more investigation. This video simply titled go fast rocket launch, broke a few records 4 being the highest and fastest amateur rocket ever launched. it was done from the Nevada desert between 8 a.m. and 11 AM. At the time I research this, they did not provide a time for the launch as you can see they do now in the description of the video. I feel they have lied about this, there is another video that accompanies it in which they go behind the scenes a little bit explain what happened before and after the launch even showing a GPS navigation system on the dash when they go to retrieve the camera that was on the balloon. Now if you zoom in on the video to the GPS the time is 11:40 in the other video they say they are doing this in the morning and you can clearly see the Sun is a little higher in the sky than what they claim it is where it should be at 7:30 AM. Shadows would be much longer than those seen in the prelaunch video. i approximated time between 9 and 11 o'clock AM. If we take this information and go to time and date.com we can see that the moon should in fact be over Australia and well below the horizon at the time of the launch.
Gyroscopes would not act the way they do or would even beconsidered reliable on planes if the earth spin at 1000 miles per hour. Gyroscope stay consistent with the same axis regardless of its container rotation. If the earth were spinning at a thousand miles per hour on rotation 90 degrees every 6 hours, the gyroscope would follow its rotation in reverse. After 6 hours of a gyroscope spinning, it would be at a 90 degree angle from where it started, after 12 hours, it will have rotated a full 180 degrees as the Earth rotates the opposite direction 180 degrees.
In a 19th century French experiment by M. M. Biot and Arago a powerful lamp with good reflectors was placed on the summit of Desierto las Palmas in Spain and able to be seen all the way from Camprey on the Island of Iviza. Since the elevation of the two points were identical and the distance between covered nearly 100 miles, if Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, the light should have been more than 6600 feet, a mile and a quarter, below the line of sight.
If the Earth and its atmosphere were constantly spinning Eastwards over 1000mph, this should somewhere somehow be seen, heard, felt or measured by someone, yet no one in history has ever experienced this alleged Eastward motion; meanwhile, however, we can hear, feel and experimentally measure even the slightest Westward breeze.
If Earth was a ball, and Antarctica was too cold to fly over, the only logical way to fly from Sydney to Santiago would be a straight shot over the Pacific staying in the Southern hemisphere the entire way. Re-fueling could be done in New Zealand or other Southern hemisphere destinations along the way if absolutely necessary. In actual fact, however, Santiago-Sydney flights go into the Northern hemisphere making stop-overs at LAX and other North American airports before continuing back down to the Southern hemisphere. Such ridiculously wayward detours make no sense on the globe but make perfect sense and form nearly straight lines when shown on a flat Earth map.
The “Midnight Sun” is an Arctic phenomenon occurring annually during the summer solstice where for several days straight an observer significantly far enough north can watch the Sun traveling circles over-head, rising and falling in the sky throughout the day, but never fully setting for upwards of 72+ hours! If the Earth were actually a spinning globe revolving around the Sun, the only place such a phenomenon as the Midnight Sun could be observed would be at the poles. Any other vantage point from 89 degrees latitude downwards could never, regardless of any tilt or inclination, see the Sun for 24 hours straight. To see the Sun for an entire revolution on a spinning globe at a point other than the poles, you would have to be looking through miles and miles of land and sea for part of the revolution!
Ayden_Linden forfeited this round.
Ayden_Linden forfeited this round.
Ayden_Linden forfeited this round.
God exists, and he's up there
Ayden_Linden forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by U.n 8 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.