you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]iDontShift 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

i can show you 100 proofs the earth is flat

if i ask for proof the earth is a ball.. all you got is pictures and videos.

you inner says you are still.

there is no 'nasa space video' of weightlessness longer than a minute.

why? because that is all the longer the vomit comet can sustain a dive before going back up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced-gravity_aircraft

[–]StillLessons 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

I gave the flat-Earth hypothesis serious consideration as a form of due diligence. Instantly dismissing it as "absurd" is lazy thinking, simply accepting a repeated "truth" from society (spherical Earth) because that story is so profoundly embedded.

That said, upon reflection of the various evidence streams, flat Earth legitimately does not hold up. The simplest most direct refutation for a flat Earth is timezones. The experience of time and sun position in the various parts of Earth - easily confirmed when we travel or talk with friends in other parts of the world instantaneously - are consistent with a spherical Earth rotating around the sun. They make no sense on a flat Earth. The models I've seen of a disc with the poles at the center and the outside of that disc is inconsistent with sun position as observed in the many places I have traveled. The sphere makes this all quite intuitive, simple, and consistent - in other words: elegant. I've always been a fan of that word in science. The best explanations have the elegance of simple alignment with intuition, observation, and consideration.

As an aside, I spent some time recently digging into the three-dimensional interactions involved in our observed positions and phases of the moon as it rotates around Earth. Very cool!! The way our universe is constructed is magical, without a doubt. We don't need some "special resistance to mainstream brainwashing" like that put forth in a flat-Earth mindset to see the divine nature of the Universe. The current science/observation-based model of spherical planets and stars floating in a vacuum is plenty magical and mysterious enough to assure God's existence. Nothing could be more inexplicable than the actual function of our universe. We don't need to "see through" the observations of centuries; we just need to look at them honestly with wonder and an open mind to see we are WAY outclassed thinking we can comprehend fully how this miraculous universe operates. As to the "why", that is entirely and completely out of our reach. We can make zero contribution to that question.

When we appreciate and recognize fully what we actually witness with a truly open mind, giving up the vain and impossible desire to mold it to our liking, we see God is actually taking care of 99.999999999% of everything, and our role is absolutely trivial, only productive when we try our best to harmonize it with the wonderful dance that is always occurring with us, within us, and around us.

[–]Astaroth 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Have you considered a Geocentric model? Earth being spherical doesn't mean a Heliocentric model is correct

[–]StillLessons 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I've never looked into the idea, but given that the model used by astrophysicists fits well in the basics with what I have observed first-hand, I'm willing to accept that in addition to the spherical nature of the planet, the heliocentric model works as well. In this case, you're right that I am breaking the original comment I made about "due diligence", but once a model agrees sufficiently with my direct experience in the basic stuff, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt unless I see obvious reasons for doubt, which in this case I don't. I am willing to devote only so much energy into projects like these.

As to going to the moon, that is a separate question entirely, and I fall very much into the camp that that didn't happen. We have not yet been there, and getting there is still apparently out of our reach.

Every story must stand on its own merits.