Are there actually people here that believe Earth is flat?

[chaddyboi66]

Didn't know @BrendioEEE was so based

Earth is 100 percent flat, it's not just "bigger" it's flat, we live in an enclosed system probably similar if not exactly the way the Bible describes in Genesis. Obviously this is a created system and muh evolution is not real in the sense of literally coming from slime and shit. NASA is a joke, if you watch enough ISS videos and people tearing them apart you should be able to realize at least this much, they are 100 percent actors behind green screens and on a movie like set


This conspiracy about the Earth being flat does seem to be a difficult hurdle to jump over, not because it's hard to prove that it's flat, but because of the wider implications. I know someone IRL super redpilled about all the other legit conspiracies, Jews, etc but can't accept the flat earth cause this person is a hardcore athiest and believes in muh evolution

Basically calling it flat is for people in the know, calling it "bigger" is more optical and consumable for people not in the know, and far more easy to argue without them hearing "Earth is Flat" and then start going full cognitive dissonance MUH MUH MUH FLAT EARTH mode or whatever.

It's also far more easy to argue, The Earth is bigger, and many "flat earthers" are taking that route to expose people to the truth, because that's the easiest way of doing so, and it's working.

The observable part of The Earth we currently are on is flat, but it's also likely that the Earth is much much much bigger. So I mean, hypothetically it could be round, but space ain't real, NASA is literally run Satanic Jewish Pedophiles.

As for evolution, I mean, I actually was majoring in evolutionary biology before I got expelled, so I heavily believe in changes and adaptations that can happen over the course of like, several thousand years, but there's a lot of shit that simply cannot be explained, or logically assumed to be true, from macro-evolution (shit that takes place over millions to billions of years), that is literally a Jewish meme, and if you question that you will be shunned from the scientific community, but here's a little secret, most evolutionary biologists agree with me on this one, they just don't want to lose their job.

Nah, if earth was flat then you would be able to see Moscow from Kazakhstan with a good telescope, but you can't because of the curveture. I used this example because the land there is basically flat af (steppes)

That's not how atmospheres work. I'm not trying to be snarky here, but because there is such a thing called an atmosphere, there's this thing called atmospheric lensing, it's the main reason why we can't see far distances, and they can even distort vision, and the way things look at far distances, making them appear bigger, or visually displaced in some way.

@BrendioEEE

 

[BrendioEEE]

@BrendioEEE

Understandable

 

[Sal]

You christian?

chaddyboi66​

 

[Ryan]

Stopped reading here, a certain person who the prophet knew personally and was one of his close followers for which he literally prayed to Allah to give him the best knowledge of the Quran wrote tasfirs that supported flath earth. Stop pretending you know alot

@Ryan you know about this?

i didnt knew
based af

 

[IncelsBraincels]

 

[Sal]

Stopped reading here, a certain person who the prophet knew personally and was one of his close followers for which he literally prayed to Allah to give him the best knowledge of the Quran wrote tasfirs that supported flath earth. Stop pretending you know alot

@Ryan you know about this?

For every person you bring from the ta'biin I can bring you one that also supported and the globe earth theory. Plus 99% of those that wrote the tasfirs didn't know a single thing about science. Those that did presented models of a heliocentric model.

Your point is null and void my friend

 

[CupOfCoffee]

@OOGABOOGA

 

[OOGABOOGA]

@OOGABOOGA

What’s good

 

[TsarTsar444]

For every person you bring from the ta'biin I can bring you one that also supported and the globe earth theory. Plus 99% of those that wrote the tasfirs didn't know a single thing about science. Those that did presented models of a heliocentric model.

Your point is null and void my friend

"For every person", nice that you ignore the "person" im talking about here, i honestly don't remember the name but i believe its Zayd ibn Thabit, who the prophet prayed to Allah to bless him with the best understanding of the Quran. He wrote commentaries about the Earth and they all support flat earth. It was only decades and centuries later when Persian cucks became muslim that they spread the round earth pagan beliefs

Why are you talking bullshit how the flat earth thing is a christian jewish thing and not muslim and you use 400 years after persian muslim scientists as an argument and saying how that is proof of muslims believing earth was round.

And its true you can find tasfirs that say the earth is round but whats interesting about them is the earlier they are the more about flat earth support they are oriented with and not round

 

[Salludon]

"For every person", nice that you ignore the "person" im talking about here, i honestly don't remember the name but i believe its Zayd ibn Thabit, who the prophet prayed to Allah to bless him with the best understanding of the Quran. He wrote commentaries about the Earth and they all support flat earth. It was only decades and centuries later when Persian cucks became muslim that they spread the round earth pagan beliefs

Why are you talking bullshit how the flat earth thing is a christian jewish thing and not muslim and you use 400 years after persian muslim scientists as an argument and saying how that is proof of muslims believing earth was round.

And its true you can find tasfirs that say the earth is round but whats interesting about them is the earlier they are the more about flat earth support they are oriented with and not round

Nah that’s not it chief. It was a widely accepted fact even at the time of Prophet that the Earth was not flat. Persians weren’t the first ones that spread this “pagan” belief.

Prophet Muhammad’s tribe, the Quraysh, was a tribe of merchants. Both he himself and his first wife (whom he was married to for 25 years) were merchants. They would likely have, on several occasions, interacted with foreign merchants from areas in which most people had already known for the past several centuries that the Earth was round. In fact, Arabia was one of those areas (where most people had already known for the past several centuries that the Earth was round). This is because of its proximity to areas like Palestine, Syria, Assyria; all of which were once part of the Hellenic or Roman world and therefore were places where most people had already known for the past several centuries that the Earth is round.

Anyone who ever heard Prophet Muhammad say or agree to that the Earth is flat would immediately realize “That wasn't the word of God” and would quickly come to the conclusion that he was a false prophet. Even the most diehard followers of his would quickly stop being his followers if they heard him proclaim that the Earth is flat.

 

[justadude]

wtf else would it be? let me guess you also believe covid is real

 

[justadude]

Tbh there is weight in this theory.. Youtube highly censore flat earth content and when u search it on utube you'll never get a video of flat earther explaing flat earth but fckin debunking videos nd parodies to make fun of this.. If u r really a truth seeker it will already raise suspicion.. They also do the same with anti vaxin content.. Conincide I think not
Most people cannot accept that they have been fooled their whole life

No expirement from earth can prove earth is gloab but many experiments can prove earth is flat

this is a really good troll tbh almost fell for it

 

[Salludon]

Most people cannot accept that they have been fooled their whole life

Some people feel special when they think they are in possession of some forbidden knowledge that have been hidden from the rest of the world. This belief makes them think they are a part of some elite group of geniuses who are not driven around like a flock of sheep by NASA and world governments. The truth is man there’s no way that the Earth is flat. If you wanna refuse 2000 years of established science and refuse to decode difficult sensory input then i’ll give you an example from Islam. There’s a Hadith where Prophet Muhammad SAW said:

“Allah will not cause my ummah to agree on falsehood; the hand of Allah is with the jamaa‘ah (the main body of the Muslims).”

If we look at the majority of muslims and scholars virtually none of them believe in the flat Earth fad.

 

[lutte]

People that believe in it are 99% Christians cause that's what the bible teaches. The bible also teaches the earth is the center of the universe.

Honestly I couldn't be asked talking with those people. THEY DON'T EVEN BELIEVE GRAVITY IS FUCKING REAL FFS lmaooo

Dave's videos are just hilarious

the earth is indeed the centre of the universe

 

[Salludon]

the earth is indeed the centre of the universe

I mean it could be, yes. The universe is just too big to deny this.

 

[lutte]

I mean it could be, yes. The universe is just too big to deny this.

first of all, what is the universe and what is a centre? Man is the centrepiece of creation thus the centre of the universe has to be earth. Quick maffs

 

[justadude]

the earth is indeed the centre of the universe

its the center of our observable universe

 

[autistic_tendencies]

No but I don’t believe it’s round either. There’s got to be more to the story

 

[Ryan]

this is a really good troll tbh almost fell for it

Wdym

 

[chaddyboi66]

[ISPOILER]



[/ISPOILER]

 

[Deleted member 16282]

tl;dw, earth is a ball

 

[Deleted member 14774]

Some people feel special when they think they are in possession of some forbidden knowledge that have been hidden from the rest of the world. This belief makes them think they are a part of some elite group of geniuses who are not driven around like a flock of sheep by NASA and world governments. The truth is man there’s no way that the Earth is flat. If you wanna refuse 2000 years of established science and refuse to decode difficult sensory input then i’ll give you an example from Islam. There’s a Hadith where Prophet Muhammad SAW said:

“Allah will not cause my ummah to agree on falsehood; the hand of Allah is with the jamaa‘ah (the main body of the Muslims).”

If we look at the majority of muslims and scholars virtually none of them believe in the flat Earth fad.

Islam started around the year 600. What was the accepted model of the earth at that time? As far as I know, everyone thought it was flat. I think someone in this thread linked something about a Muslim scholar in the 11th century discovering that the earth was a globe, but it wouldn’t be of any significance if people already believed it was a globe. You can’t discover something that’s already known. So if at the start of Islam, the majority of people thought it was flat, when did the majority start thinking it was a globe. I’m guessing some time around the 1800s, which is coincidentally the same time when the Europeans started promoting the idea heavily. And then all the interpretations of the Quran changed regarding the shape of the earth, and the Quran was saying the earth was a globe this whole time? Seems suspicious
But if I’m wrong and Muslims were saying consistently since the start of Islam that the earth was a globe, then let me know

Also even in Europe all the Christians thought the Earth was flat until the 1700s, and even until 1760 you would be tortured for saying the earth went around the sun. It really only became accepted in the 1800s. Do you really think Islam was over 1000 years early to reach this independently?

 

[Tony]

me, @TsarTsar444 , @lutte , @cloUder , @BrendioEEE , @Gargantuan @Amnesia @germanlooks believe in flat earth

the earth is indeed the centre of the universe

we are nazis too

 

[lutte]

me, @TsarTsar444 , @lutte , @cloUder , @BrendioEEE , @Gargantuan believe in flat earth




we are nazis too

fuck globecucks

 

[Salludon]

I’m guessing some time around the 1800s, which is coincidentally the same time when the Europeans started promoting the idea heavily.

Many Islamic scholars way before the modern science was established had calculated the Earth’s circumference themselves and it was very close to the modern calculations.

One of those that did the calculations was Al biruni (d. 1048) and he wrote about it in his book “Al- Qanun al-masudi” or Canon Masudic. He estimated that the circumference of the Earth is 39,830 km which is more accurate then Eratosthenes’ 39,690 km. The estimation of the Muslim scholar was only a few kilometers different from the current radius of the Earth, known to modern scientists nowadays.

Ibn Hazm (d.1064), wrote in his book Al-Fisal. “ I do not know a single scholar worth the title of a scholar who claims other than that the Earth is round.”


Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1328), still much earlier than the 1800s, said, “Know that it is agreed that the Earth is round-shaped. The orbits are circular as stated in the Book, the Sunnah (Prophetic tradition) and the consensus of the scholars. The word Falak (orbit) means that it is round.”

{… each in an orbit floating.} [Quran, 21:33]

 

[Deleted member 14774]

Many Islamic scholars way before the modern science was established had calculated the Earth’s circumference themselves and it was very close to the modern calculations.

One of those that did the calculations was Al biruni (d. 1048) and he wrote about it in his book “Al- Qanun al-masudi” or Canon Masudic. He estimated that the circumference of the Earth is 39,830 km which is more accurate then Eratosthenes’ 39,690 km. The estimation of the Muslim scholar was only a few kilometers different from the current radius of the Earth, known to modern scientists nowadays.

Ibn Hazm (d.1064), wrote in his book Al-Fisal. “ I do not know a single scholar worth the title of a scholar who claims other than that the Earth is round.”


Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1328), still much earlier than the 1800s, said, “Know that it is agreed that the Earth is round-shaped. The orbits are circular as stated in the Book, the Sunnah (Prophetic tradition) and the consensus of the scholars. The word Falak (orbit) means that it is round.”

{… each in an orbit floating.} [Quran, 21:33]

But Islam started around the year 600, the earliest examples you gave are about 400 years after that. So what was the general opinion during those 400 years? And those were individual muslim scholars not the muslim authority at the time whose views can be regarded as the position of the religion as a whole. Just like there were Christian astronomers during the 1700s who were saying the sun went around the earth etc. Also those sources were during the Golden Age of Islam, where lots of advancements were being made in almost every field, but that's separate from the religion itself. Are there sources of the muslim leaders having any opinions on this topic? For example in Christianity it's clear that the Church was completely against the globe earth ideologies, until 1760 or so, when they decided they would no longer torture people for saying the earth goes around the sun. Christianity and Islam are both Abrahamic religions, so don't you think it would be a huge deal and widely known if the muslims believed the globe earth 1000 years before the Christians? And I know people say there are lots of mentions in the Quran where it says the earth is a globe etc, but the ones I have seen are very vague, and they could be figurative rather than literal. And there are also arguments for the opposite, such as this:

until he reached the setting ˹point˺ of the sun, which appeared to him to be setting in a spring of murky water, where he found some people. We said, “O Ⱬul-Qarnain! Either punish them or treat them kindly.” [Quran, 18:86].

I know people say that this is only talking figuratively, but it goes both ways. And if the earth is a globe going around the sun in space, why would there even be a figurative mention of this sort about the sun "setting in a spring of murky water".

But about the scientists you mentioned, maybe their ideas were correct. For the first one, maybe the circumference of the flat earth is 39000km. For the second, people say the flat earth is round (not a sphere). And for the last one, that doesn't really mean anything that the orbits are circular. The orbits of the sun and moon in the sky is circular. And the day / night is a cycle (circular), which may be a different meaning, but that doesn't prove / disprove flat earth. The idea that the earth is a globe orbiting the sun at 67,000 mph, while the sun is orbiting the galaxy, which is also moving rapidly, is very different.

And I'll also add that I don't 100% believe flat earth, I would say I'm 50/50, but it's not as silly as it seems

 

[Salludon]

But Islam started around the year 600, the earliest examples you gave are about 400 years after that. So what was the general opinion during those 400 years?

No idea, i couldn’t find anything on it. There’s no Hadith directly from the Prophet regarding the Earth’s shape. It could be that it was widely known the Earth was round so no one asked about it or they knew it was flat or it could also mean that back then nobody gave a fuck about Earth’s shape. But if a scholarly consensus was formed 400 years after then it means majority of scholars during that time probably had the same belief.

And those were individual muslim scholars not the muslim authority at the time whose views can be regarded as the position of the religion as a whole.

In Islam there are 4 authorities: the Qur'an, the Sunnah, Qiyas (the concept of analogical reasoning) and Ijma (consensus). The Ijma is considered to be an authority according to this saying of the Prophet:


“Allah will not cause my ummah to agree on falsehood; the hand of Allah is with the jamaa‘ah (the main body of the Muslims).” At-Tirmidhi (2167)

Islam has many sects, all of them have a lot of differences with each other but on some matters all scholars of Islam from all sects agree upon therefore those things are considered to be an authority just like Quran and sayings of the Prophet.

Kennisgeving voor omleiding

You can look up views of any actual scholars of Islam from any sect they all agree upon the fact that Earth is not flat. On the contrary you will find some muslim schizophrenics on Youtube who try to interpret Quran in their words and try to prove what apparently all the scholars couldn’t find.

And if the earth is a globe going around the sun in space, why would there even be a figurative mention of this sort about the sun "setting in a spring of murky water".

Because if you look at the sunset from a beach it does does look like the sun is setting in a murky water. So the Qur’an narrates the state and the feelings of Zulqarnain in this way.

“He felt that as if the sun is drowning in the dark water.”



This is exactly what it describes. Can you explain this using the flat earth model? According to flat earthers, sun and moon are moving around over the Earth. If that was the case we will never see the sun actually set like this.

people say the flat earth is round (not a sphere)

Earth is an oblate spheroid. The diameter is long across the equator between poles. The difference is just 0.3%. It is impossible to see the oblateness from photos taken from the space without careful measurements. It just looks round so its easier to call it round in day to day life. Imagine explaining to your child that the Earth is an oblate spheroid.

And for the last one, that doesn't really mean anything that the orbits are circular. The orbits of the sun and moon in the sky is circular. And the day / night is a cycle (circular), which may be a different meaning, but that doesn't prove / disprove flat earth.

What the word orbit means is

“to follow a circular or elliptical path around a central body. Usually a planet, moon or satellite is described as orbiting, but a child who has too much sugar can sometimes orbit around his parents in an annoying fashion.”

In chemistry, electrons revolving around nucleas are said to be orbiting.

So the word orbit by itself requires a central body to be in orbit. In the flat earth model, the sun and moon are not orbiting anything they are just moving in circular directions over the surface of Earth.

 

[Sal]

No idea, i couldn’t find anything on it. There’s no Hadith directly from the Prophet regarding the Earth’s shape. It could be that it was widely known the Earth was round so no one asked about it or they knew it was flat or it could also mean that back then nobody gave a fuck about Earth’s shape. But if a scholarly consensus was formed 400 years after then it means majority of scholars during that time probably had the same belief.



In Islam there are 4 authorities: the Qur'an, the Sunnah, Qiyas (the concept of analogical reasoning) and Ijma (consensus). The Ijma is considered to be an authority according to this saying of the Prophet:


“Allah will not cause my ummah to agree on falsehood; the hand of Allah is with the jamaa‘ah (the main body of the Muslims).” At-Tirmidhi (2167)

Islam has many sects, all of them have a lot of differences with each other but on some matters all scholars of Islam from all sects agree upon therefore those things are considered to be an authority just like Quran and sayings of the Prophet.

Kennisgeving voor omleiding

You can look up views of any actual scholars of Islam from any sect they all agree upon the fact that Earth is not flat. On the contrary you will find some muslim schizophrenics on Youtube who try to interpret Quran in their words and try to prove what apparently all the scholars couldn’t find.



Because if you look at the sunset from a beach it does does look like the sun is setting in a murky water. So the Qur’an narrates the state and the feelings of Zulqarnain in this way.

“He felt that as if the sun is drowning in the dark water.”



This is exactly what it describes. Can you explain this using the flat earth model? According to flat earthers, sun and moon are moving around over the Earth. If that was the case we will never see the sun actually set like this.




Earth is an oblate spheroid. The diameter is long across the equator between poles. The difference is just 0.3%. It is impossible to see the oblateness from photos taken from the space without careful measurements. It just looks round so its easier to call it round in day to day life. Imagine explaining to your child that the Earth is an oblate spheroid.



What the word orbit means is

“to follow a circular or elliptical path around a central body. Usually a planet, moon or satellite is described as orbiting, but a child who has too much sugar can sometimes orbit around his parents in an annoying fashion.”

In chemistry, electrons revolving around nucleas are said to be orbiting.

View attachment 1426868

So the word orbit by itself requires a central body to be in orbit. In the flat earth model, the sun and moon are not orbiting anything they are just moving in circular directions over the surface of Earth.

 

[Deleted member 14774]

No idea, i couldn’t find anything on it. There’s no Hadith directly from the Prophet regarding the Earth’s shape. It could be that it was widely known the Earth was round so no one asked about it or they knew it was flat or it could also mean that back then nobody gave a fuck about Earth’s shape. But if a scholarly consensus was formed 400 years after then it means majority of scholars during that time probably had the same belief.

Every culture has strong views on the shape of the earth, no one just ignores it. There’s no way that the average Muslim for the first 400 years thought we were on a spinning “oblate spheroid” moving through space at thousands of miles per hour, while orbiting the sun, which is orbiting the galaxy, etc. And even after those 400 years, I would guess until the 1800s, the majority of Muslims believed in flat earth. All these people did was pray and go to the mosque. How could they be wrong about something as important as the shape of the earth they live on?

In Islam there are 4 authorities: the Qur'an, the Sunnah, Qiyas (the concept of analogical reasoning) and Ijma (consensus). The Ijma is considered to be an authority according to this saying of the Prophet:


“Allah will not cause my ummah to agree on falsehood; the hand of Allah is with the jamaa‘ah (the main body of the Muslims).” At-Tirmidhi (2167)

Islam has many sects, all of them have a lot of differences with each other but on some matters all scholars of Islam from all sects agree upon therefore those things are considered to be an authority just like Quran and sayings of the Prophet.

Kennisgeving voor omleiding

You can look up views of any actual scholars of Islam from any sect they all agree upon the fact that Earth is not flat. On the contrary you will find some muslim schizophrenics on Youtube who try to interpret Quran in their words and try to prove what apparently all the scholars couldn’t find.

Look at who controls Mecca today and their actions. USA Saudi and Israel are one entity now. It’s literally the house of god these people collect taxes for, people who kill Palestinians and make deals with zionists. But if you want to believe that the majority of scholars in Islam can never be wrong because of that quote, then I guess there’s no logical argument to counter that. But eventually the majority of scholars will start believing in evolution, or LGBT, or whatever is pushed by the western media. Sure, at the moment it’s a minority who support this, compared to the Vatican for example which will mirror the views of the US government, but give it time and it will be similar in Islam (if things continue the way they are going).

“He felt that as if the sun is drowning in the dark water.”



This is exactly what it describes. Can you explain this using the flat earth model? According to flat earthers, sun and moon are moving around over the Earth. If that was the case we will never see the sun actually set like this.

Yeah you’re right I guess that wasn’t a good example, it’s more figurative

Earth is an oblate spheroid. The diameter is long across the equator between poles. The difference is just 0.3%. It is impossible to see the oblateness from photos taken from the space without careful measurements. It just looks round so its easier to call it round in day to day life. Imagine explaining to your child that the Earth is an oblate spheroid.



What the word orbit means is

“to follow a circular or elliptical path around a central body. Usually a planet, moon or satellite is described as orbiting, but a child who has too much sugar can sometimes orbit around his parents in an annoying fashion.”

In chemistry, electrons revolving around nucleas are said to be orbiting.

View attachment 1426868

So the word orbit by itself requires a central body to be in orbit. In the flat earth model, the sun and moon are not orbiting anything they are just moving in circular directions over the surface of Earth.

Actually the word used was فلك. Look that up in google translate and you can see the other translations are: astronomy, sphere, orb, and circuit. Of course now that the globe earth is accepted by science, all the interpretations of this want to say it describes orbit in the same way as globe earth science, but what if the actual meaning was one of the other 4 meanings (80% chance considering there’s 5 total meanings)? Then it wouldn’t mean anything as far as proving or disproving flat earth.

 

[Deleted member 14774]

No idea, i couldn’t find anything on it. There’s no Hadith directly from the Prophet regarding the Earth’s shape. It could be that it was widely known the Earth was round so no one asked about it or they knew it was flat or it could also mean that back then nobody gave a fuck about Earth’s shape. But if a scholarly consensus was formed 400 years after then it means majority of scholars during that time probably had the same belief.



In Islam there are 4 authorities: the Qur'an, the Sunnah, Qiyas (the concept of analogical reasoning) and Ijma (consensus). The Ijma is considered to be an authority according to this saying of the Prophet:


“Allah will not cause my ummah to agree on falsehood; the hand of Allah is with the jamaa‘ah (the main body of the Muslims).” At-Tirmidhi (2167)

Islam has many sects, all of them have a lot of differences with each other but on some matters all scholars of Islam from all sects agree upon therefore those things are considered to be an authority just like Quran and sayings of the Prophet.

Kennisgeving voor omleiding

You can look up views of any actual scholars of Islam from any sect they all agree upon the fact that Earth is not flat. On the contrary you will find some muslim schizophrenics on Youtube who try to interpret Quran in their words and try to prove what apparently all the scholars couldn’t find.



Because if you look at the sunset from a beach it does does look like the sun is setting in a murky water. So the Qur’an narrates the state and the feelings of Zulqarnain in this way.

“He felt that as if the sun is drowning in the dark water.”



This is exactly what it describes. Can you explain this using the flat earth model? According to flat earthers, sun and moon are moving around over the Earth. If that was the case we will never see the sun actually set like this.




Earth is an oblate spheroid. The diameter is long across the equator between poles. The difference is just 0.3%. It is impossible to see the oblateness from photos taken from the space without careful measurements. It just looks round so its easier to call it round in day to day life. Imagine explaining to your child that the Earth is an oblate spheroid.



What the word orbit means is

“to follow a circular or elliptical path around a central body. Usually a planet, moon or satellite is described as orbiting, but a child who has too much sugar can sometimes orbit around his parents in an annoying fashion.”

In chemistry, electrons revolving around nucleas are said to be orbiting.

View attachment 1426868

So the word orbit by itself requires a central body to be in orbit. In the flat earth model, the sun and moon are not orbiting anything they are just moving in circular directions over the surface of Earth.

You can see in that video how previous scholars interpreted the Quran as meaning the earth is flat, and then once globe science came out the interpretations coincidentally changed

 

[Salludon]

There’s no way that the average Muslim for the first 400 years thought we were on a spinning “oblate spheroid” moving through space at thousands of miles per hour, while orbiting the sun, which is orbiting the galaxy, etc.

Or average human for that matter. Humans in the first 400 years also didn’t thought we would be able to fly and could see and talk to person living on the other side of the planet. They obviously lacked any common sense that we have now. Most of their mind would have been too narrow to think of a sphere rotating at 1600+ kms and revolving a 100+ times bigger star filled with hydrogen and helium. The old people believed shit like witchcraft etc. That’s why some of them interpreted the Quranic verses favouring flat Earth.

And even after those 400 years, I would guess until the 1800s, the majority of Muslims believed in flat earth.

I’ve already talked about how most of the 3rd and 4th generation of Islamic scholars did not believe in the flat Earth so you cannot say they were motivated by the modern interpretation of the cosmos. The following article talks about these early scholars with references in case you wanna take a look.

Does the Qur’an say the earth is flat? Islamic scholarship & the multiplicity of readings approach

This article addresses the question of whether the Qur'an says the world is flat. This question is answered in a comprehensive way by referring to classical Islamic scholarship, the Qur'an and applying the multiplicity of readings approach.

sapienceinstitute.org

Now its up to you to provide proof as to why do you say they all believed in flat Earth until the 1800s so we can compare whos evidence is stronger.

Look at who controls Mecca today and their actions. USA Saudi and Israel are one entity now. It’s literally the house of god these people collect taxes for, people who kill Palestinians and make deals with zionists. But if you want to believe that the majority of scholars in Islam can never be wrong because of that quote, then I guess there’s no logical argument to counter that.

House of Saud is just a corrupt family. Muhammad bin Salman even opened a night club in Saudi Arabia. It’s funny that Wahhabism tries to emulate the practices of the 7th century, yet conveniently forget that Islam frowns upon hereditary monarchy. They are not an authority in Islam.

But eventually the majority of scholars will start believing in evolution, or LGBT, or whatever is pushed by the western media.

Why do you think that? Is there any example in Islamic history where muslims went against Quran and Sunnah and did Ijma on something like that? If Islamic jurisprudence was an evolving thing like Christianity then we would have made pork halal long time ago.

Of course now that the globe earth is accepted by science, all the interpretations of this want to say it describes orbit in the same way as globe earth science,

Already explained why this isn’t true.

You can see in that video how previous scholars interpreted the Quran as meaning the earth is flat, and then once globe science came out the interpretations coincidentally changed

This is one of the sillier arguments against Islam and is the fallacy of the undistributed middle which is the reason you won’t see any atheist use flat earth against muslims in an actual debate.

Decoding the meaning of Quran is not something a random guy who is not even muslim nor has any background in arabic can do. You can see how he pronounces the word ‘Allah’. For instance, the word "Earth" in the Qur'an is talking about the planet/world as a whole. The word ARD is context-sensitive. Many times it means land, country, earth (as in: dirt), etc.
Qur'an is mostly concerned with the surface of the earth when talking about Earth, not the planet, because this is the part humans actually see and deal with.

Again, the Quran doesn't teach that the world is flat, and I've never meet a Muslim who came away with that conclusion thats why i was so surprised to realise some people actually believe in flat Earth through this forum. Additionally Muslims have a history of looking to planetary motion to determine prayer time, and those calculations require one to believe that the world is not flat but part of a solar system.

 

[Deleted member 12002]

I wonder whats the overlap between flat earthers and anti vax?

I'm not anti vax per se, but I'm not getting the rona vaccine. I don't like being told what I should do. And if you're vaccinated why the fck should you care if I'm not? I like pissing people off. The people who don't mind their fckng business.

I want to shout from the rooftops, "I'M NOT GETTING VAXXED! DO SOMETHING! COME GET SOME MOTHER FCKRS!!!"

I ain't getting vaxxed. I'll impose on anybody. If my status makes anybody uncomfortable then their b*tch ass will just have to leave.

 

[Deleted member 14774]

Or average human for that matter. Humans in the first 400 years also didn’t thought we would be able to fly and could see and talk to person living on the other side of the planet. They obviously lacked any common sense that we have now. Most of their mind would have been too narrow to think of a sphere rotating at 1600+ kms and revolving a 100+ times bigger star filled with hydrogen and helium. The old people believed shit like witchcraft etc. That’s why some of them interpreted the Quranic verses favouring flat Earth.

Yeah I mean there's nothing inherent in Islam that teaches the globe earth model. You can say that the Quran doesn't teach flat earth, but it doesn't teach globe earth either, otherwise muslims would have been believing the globe earth before scientists were involved. There's a lot of extreme ideas in the globe earth model that none of those islamic scholars believed.

I’ve already talked about how most of the 3rd and 4th generation of Islamic scholars did not believe in the flat Earth so you cannot say they were motivated by the modern interpretation of the cosmos. The following article talks about these early scholars with references in case you wanna take a look.

Does the Qur’an say the earth is flat? Islamic scholarship & the multiplicity of readings approach

This article addresses the question of whether the Qur'an says the world is flat. This question is answered in a comprehensive way by referring to classical Islamic scholarship, the Qur'an and applying the multiplicity of readings approach.

sapienceinstitute.org

Now its up to you to provide proof as to why do you say they all believed in flat Earth until the 1800s so we can compare whos evidence is stronger.

I looked at some of those references. The globe earth model is different from just saying the earth is a sphere. Like flat earthers believe there is a dome covering earth, combined with the bottom of the earth, it could look like a sphere anyway

. But I don't have any evidence for saying that all muslims believed the earth was flat until the 1800s, I mean even the muslim scholars didn't believe the extreme ideas that are part of the Globe Earth model, like we're spinning around in space, orbiting the sun which is 90 million miles away, while the sun is orbiting the galaxy, while the galaxy is also moving. And the moon is also orbiting us during this time. These are the extreme ideas that I'm doubtful about.
During this extreme movement and rotation in space, each night the stars still align in the same place? When the stars are supposed to also be orbiting the galaxy at extreme speeds. This is a short 3 minute video which talks about this:


Also gravity is just a theory, like they haven't been able to measure or detect it with modern equipment, but they teach it like it's a law of the universe. Flat earthers say everything has density, if it's heavier than the surroundings, it goes down, otherwise it goes up. Like a helium balloon will go up, because it has a very light density, not because it's an anti gravity device. That theory makes a lot of sense to me.

And then there's the whole NASA moon landings stuff which is almost certainly bs. If you look at the videos that they took on the moon, it looks so fake. And they say they haven't been back to the moon for 50 years or so because they just lost the technology. Maybe the earth isn't flat, but NASA is definitely lying about a lot of things. And 99% of all the pictures / videos you see of space are CGI animations, and they will admit this. There are photos / videos that they claim are not CGI but there's in depth videos debunking these, which seem legit.

Also some other facts which don't prove anything but I just think it's interesting: the sun and the moon appear to be the exact same size to us from earth, even though they're at two completely different distances from earth. So when there's a solar eclipse, it looks like this

And the moon only has one side facing towards us all the time, we never see the other side of the moon. And the globe earth people don't have any explanation for this.
But if you have time you should watch some videos from the channel I sent (Eric Dubay). He makes a lot of convincing arguments, and at the least it makes you look into physics / astronomy, and exercises your critical thinking skills

Why do you think that? Is there any example in Islamic history where muslims went against Quran and Sunnah and did Ijma on something like that? If Islamic jurisprudence was an evolving thing like Christianity then we would have made pork halal long time ago.

I don't have any reason to believe that actually, I was thinking of muslims in general rather than the scholars. Now that I think about it, the scholars have been consistent, it's the followers of the religion that have changed.

Again, the Quran doesn't teach that the world is flat, and I've never meet a Muslim who came away with that conclusion thats why i was so surprised to realise some people actually believe in flat Earth through this forum. Additionally Muslims have a history of looking to planetary motion to determine prayer time, and those calculations require one to believe that the world is not flat but part of a solar system.

Observable astronomy still works the same on Flat earth. It's just the theories for what's happening which varies

 

[DegenerateSkullCell]

Or average human for that matter. Humans in the first 400 years also didn’t thought we would be able to fly and could see and talk to person living on the other side of the planet. They obviously lacked any common sense that we have now. Most of their mind would have been too narrow to think of a sphere rotating at 1600+ kms and revolving a 100+ times bigger star filled with hydrogen and helium. The old people believed shit like witchcraft etc. That’s why some of them interpreted the Quranic verses favouring flat Earth.


I’ve already talked about how most of the 3rd and 4th generation of Islamic scholars did not believe in the flat Earth so you cannot say they were motivated by the modern interpretation of the cosmos. The following article talks about these early scholars with references in case you wanna take a look.

Does the Qur’an say the earth is flat? Islamic scholarship & the multiplicity of readings approach

This article addresses the question of whether the Qur'an says the world is flat. This question is answered in a comprehensive way by referring to classical Islamic scholarship, the Qur'an and applying the multiplicity of readings approach.

sapienceinstitute.org

Now its up to you to provide proof as to why do you say they all believed in flat Earth until the 1800s so we can compare whos evidence is stronger.



House of Saud is just a corrupt family. Muhammad bin Salman even opened a night club in Saudi Arabia. It’s funny that Wahhabism tries to emulate the practices of the 7th century, yet conveniently forget that Islam frowns upon hereditary monarchy. They are not an authority in Islam.


Why do you think that? Is there any example in Islamic history where muslims went against Quran and Sunnah and did Ijma on something like that? If Islamic jurisprudence was an evolving thing like Christianity then we would have made pork halal long time ago.



Already explained why this isn’t true.




This is one of the sillier arguments against Islam and is the fallacy of the undistributed middle which is the reason you won’t see any atheist use flat earth against muslims in an actual debate.

Decoding the meaning of Quran is not something a random guy who is not even muslim nor has any background in arabic can do. You can see how he pronounces the word ‘Allah’. For instance, the word "Earth" in the Qur'an is talking about the planet/world as a whole. The word ARD is context-sensitive. Many times it means land, country, earth (as in: dirt), etc.
Qur'an is mostly concerned with the surface of the earth when talking about Earth, not the planet, because this is the part humans actually see and deal with.

Again, the Quran doesn't teach that the world is flat, and I've never meet a Muslim who came away with that conclusion thats why i was so surprised to realise some people actually believe in flat Earth through this forum. Additionally Muslims have a history of looking to planetary motion to determine prayer time, and those calculations require one to believe that the world is not flat but part of a solar system.

Quite articulate for a man that smashes a hammer into his skull daily. Keep defending Islam. May Allah grant you paradise you curry munching chad

 

[Salludon]

I mean even the muslim scholars didn't believe the extreme ideas that are part of the Globe Earth model, like we're spinning around in space, orbiting the sun which is 90 million miles away, while the sun is orbiting the galaxy, while the galaxy is also moving. And the moon is also orbiting us during this time.

You’re just projecting your own beliefs on them since you, as a man living in 21st century, find these ideas extreme and hard to believe so the people living in the 15th century must have the same view.

During this extreme movement and rotation in space, each night the stars still align in the same place? When the stars are supposed to also be orbiting the galaxy at extreme speeds.

They ARE moving. Just because we don’t see them changing from night to night doesn’t mean they aren’t moving. Take north star for example, right now its Polaris, in the time of ancient Egyptians it was another star called Thuban, which is documented. In a few thousand years it will be another star. The precession is extremely slow. You have to keep in mind how big these things are. 200km/s might seem like a lot to you but for celestial bodies its nothing.

Also gravity is just a theory, like they haven't been able to measure or detect it with modern equipment, but they teach it like it's a law of the universe.

Definition of scientific theory:

“A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation. As with most (if not all) forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive power and explanatory capability.”

The scientific method doesn't deal in facts, only theory, tests, and observations. Gravity is the theory that consistently matches our observations from testing, and no other theory is plausible. But science always leaves a door open for new evidence, and changing theories. So saying “it’s just a theory” is idiotic because scientific theory is not just an idea you had while you were on the toilet.

Flat earthers say everything has density, if it's heavier than the surroundings, it goes down, otherwise it goes up. Like a helium balloon will go up, because it has a very light density, not because it's an anti gravity device. That theory makes a lot of sense to me.

Density is not even a force. Density is defined as how tightly or loosely packed a substance is

You mentioned that if its heavier than the surroundings it goes down. However, density and buoyancy don't have a vector. If you release a stone that's more dense than the air around it then it should logically go left or right or diagonal sometimes. It doesn't, instead always travel downward. This vector could be explained several ways but the only way that appears consistent is a force towards the earth aka gravity.

If I suck all the air out of a box and drop something inside it, that object still falls. Not only that, the density or even mass of that object is completely irrelevant. It all falls at the same speed 9.8m/s2. Here’s what i mean:



Now I know sending a video of the moon is not something a flat earther is going to appreciate lol so here’s the same experiment done in a vacuum chamber here on Earth.




As you can see that disregarding air resistance, all objects on Earth fall with the acceleration of 9.8m/s^2 , no matter their density or any other material property.

If gravity doesn't exist, and instead things fall because of density, ask your flat earther gurus to derive a mathematical function that takes in densities of two interacting objects as an input and gives 9.8 m/s^2 as an output for all combinations of densities.

And then there's the whole NASA moon landings stuff which is almost certainly bs.

No it isn’t. I can elab on this further.

And the globe earth people don't have any explanation for this.

You’re asking explanations about solar eclipse from globe earthers? Ask flat earthers about this one lol according to their model this shouldn’t even happen in the first place.

Quite articulate for a man that smashes a hammer into his skull daily. Keep defending Islam. May Allah grant you paradise you curry munching chad

Aameen. You too.

 

[Deleted member 14774]

You’re just projecting your own beliefs on them since you, as a man living in 21st century, find these ideas extreme and hard to believe so the people living in the 15th century must have the same view.

How am I projecting my ideas onto them? I looked at the article you linked with the references of islamic scholars' views on the shape of the Earth, and they said it was round, spherical, shaped like a ball, etc. The globe earth model is much more complex than this, with ideas that were primarily developed in the 1700s / 1800s. There were completely different theories being put forward by scientists in the 1800s, and people were torn between which one was correct.

Definition of scientific theory:

“A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation. As with most (if not all) forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive power and explanatory capability.”

The scientific method doesn't deal in facts, only theory, tests, and observations. Gravity is the theory that consistently matches our observations from testing, and no other theory is plausible. But science always leaves a door open for new evidence, and changing theories. So saying “it’s just a theory” is idiotic because scientific theory is not just an idea you had while you were on the toilet.

Watch the first 5-10 mins of this video:
The guy is Firas Zahabi, a well known muslim mma trainer, who's very intelligent and also has videos with muslim youtubers discussing religion / philosophy. But I think what he's saying here with the example of gravity is relevant. You shouldn't place too much importance in scientific theories. The only thing we really have are observations. The meaning behind those observations can be changed indefinitely.
You linked the Cavendish Experiment before, but like I said, the results of that have never been replicated, so where is the scientific proof for the idea that all mass inherently attracts mass?

Density is not even a force. Density is defined as how tightly or loosely packed a substance is

View attachment 1427566


You mentioned that if its heavier than the surroundings it goes down. However, density and buoyancy don't have a vector. If you release a stone that's more dense than the air around it then it should logically go left or right or diagonal sometimes. It doesn't, instead always travel downward. This vector could be explained several ways but the only way that appears consistent is a force towards the earth aka gravity.

If I suck all the air out of a box and drop something inside it, that object still falls. Not only that, the density or even mass of that object is completely irrelevant. It all falls at the same speed 9.8m/s2. Here’s what i mean:



Now I know sending a video of the moon is not something a flat earther is going to appreciate lol so here’s the same experiment done in a vacuum chamber here on Earth.




As you can see that disregarding air resistance, all objects on Earth fall with the acceleration of 9.8m/s^2 , no matter their density or any other material property.

If gravity doesn't exist, and instead things fall because of density, ask your flat earther gurus to derive a mathematical function that takes in densities of two interacting objects as an input and gives 9.8 m/s^2 as an output for all combinations of densities.

According to flat earth, 9.8 m/s^2 is the maximum acceleration that objects have. In the presence of an atmosphere, air resistance effects the acceleration. As for why 9.8 instead of another number, or why objects go down instead of staying still or moving in another direction, I don't know. There is this page which has explanations for all of this stuff (https://wiki.tfes.org/General_Physics), but I don't understand it, and it's too much for me to go back and forth with the globe model and go further into each theory to debunk which one is true. People spend lifetimes on researching this stuff, and it's a never ending process. But that's why I said I'm closer to 50/50 when it comes to flat earth. It's more of a theory rather than something which has practical effects in your life, and I don't think it's a good use of time to try to determine scientifically for certain which model is true. You can always come up with new theories to debunk existing ideas, and who's to say who's right? Similar to what Firas was saying. Until we physically experience the globe earth first hand, or until enough people have that it's statistically extremely unprobeable that they are all lying, it's good to keep an open mind.

No it isn’t. I can elab on this further.

Seriously? You believe everything NASA says officially about the moon landing, when the last time they went to the moon was, and why they haven't gone back?

 

[Deleted member 14918]

Every fking thing that reaches a big size becomes round like asteroids, but earth is somehow flat, and every scientific research that is based on the earth being a globe is fake lol

 

[Salludon]

How am I projecting my ideas onto them?

You’re contradicting youself. First you said the modern concept of the complex heliocentric system was established in 18th century and on the other hand you’re saying:

There's a lot of extreme ideas in the globe earth model that none of those islamic scholars believed.

So if the concept was first born in 17/18th century how could the people from 10th century had believed it?

The guy is Firas Zahabi, a well known muslim mma trainer, who's very intelligent and also has videos with muslim youtubers discussing religion / philosophy. But I think what he's saying here with the example of gravity is relevant. You shouldn't place too much importance in scientific theories. The only thing we really have are observations. The meaning behind those observations can be changed indefinitely.

Like I said before that the big misconception of science is that that science finds out what is true. It actually finds out what is false. As the saying goes, "all models are wrong, but some are useful". Think of the difference: is gravity caused by the earth spinning, or gravitons, or “gremlins” as Faris said or something else? We can show lots of things that it isn't (like the FE version) but it's very hard to show definitively what it "is". So we take the most plausible theory and run with it.

You linked the Cavendish Experiment before, but like I said, the results of that have never been replicated, so where is the scientific proof for the idea that all mass inherently attracts mass?

What do you mean the results have never been replicated? Most college-level physics students will replicate it. There’s hundreds of youtube videos where people have replicated it just go take a look.

The thing with disproving flat Earth isn't a lack of options but rather the opposite. There are so many thousands of experiments and observations that disprove it that you benefit by nailing down the simplest and easiest to recreate ones. Cavendish is like the novice level of gravity investigation. Since Cavendish we have far, far more accurate means and many diverse assortments of experimental device that can measure attraction between masses. So many, they require an entire literature review just to appreciate.

Invited Review Article: Measurements of the Newtonian constant of gravitation, G

By many accounts, the Newtonian constant of gravitation G is the fundamental constant that is most difficult to measure accurately. Over the past three decades,

aip.scitation.org

Similar to what Firas was saying. Until we physically experience the globe earth first hand, or until enough people have that it's statistically extremely unprobeable that they are all lying, it's good to keep an open mind.

No we don’t have to see the globe with our eyes to believe it.

Did you see your mother give birth to you first hand? No? So how are you sure that shes really your mother? You just took your parents word for it.

Just consider going to the supermarket and buying canned soup. Do you have evidence that what’s in the can is edible? Do you know how, where and by whom this food was produced? Why are you not afraid of eating it?

Isn’t this entirely irrational? No because you do have evidence how the legal system in your country work. You know that there are regulations on what can be sold as food. You know if whats in that can was harmful to you then a lot of people along the food chain would be punished and they don’t want that.

Our trust in canned food or round Earth for that matter is an entirely reasonable inference from evidence, the evidence that we collected from our sensory input.

Seriously? You believe everything NASA says officially about the moon landing, when the last time they went to the moon was, and why they haven't gone back?

Lol first of all why is it that NASA is the only space agency that is talked about by the flat earthers. Do you guys not know that there are 72 different space agencies all over the world? Even Indians have a space agency.

And secondly about why they haven’t went back to the moon?

Well, going to the moon is neither easy nor cheap. There's also no immediate return on investment - it was more of a status thing back then when USSR was clearly ahead of USA when it came to space exploration. They had put the first satellite in orbit, the first man in orbit - hell, they put the first woman in orbit in the early 60s (the US wouldn't send a woman into space until the 80s). The US was motivated in the 1960s because they wanted their political and economic system to be seen as the best in the world, and especially better than the alternative that the Soviet Union was offering. This was during the Cold War and such perceptions were seen as very serious business.

So the US was both capable and motivated, and their motivation was to do something nobody else had done to prove they were the best. Nobody else had both the motivation and ability once the US already did it. Something can only be accomplished for the first time once.

In this day, no one else wants to pony up the tens of billions needed to do it when there's not much to gain right now. If we went to another planetary body it’d most likely be Mars and Elon Musk is already on it.

 

[chaddyboi66]

Because if you look at the sunset from a beach it does does look like the sun is setting in a murky water. So the Qur’an narrates the state and the feelings of Zulqarnain in this way.

“He felt that as if the sun is drowning in the dark water.”



This is exactly what it describes. Can you explain this using the flat earth model? According to flat earthers, sun and moon are moving around over the Earth. If that was the case we will never see the sun actually set like this.


So the word orbit by itself requires a central body to be in orbit. In the flat earth model, the sun and moon are not orbiting anything they are just moving in circular directions over the surface of Earth.

About the sun,


Sunsets would work like this on a flat Earth:
[Yes I time stamped it]





This is his whole section from @6:30-13:00 on how the sun and moon work:

 

[Deleted member 14774]

You’re contradicting youself. First you said the modern concept of the complex heliocentric system was established in 18th century and on the other hand you’re saying:

So if the concept was first born in 17/18th century how could the people from 10th century had believed it?

Just saying the Earth is a sphere is different from saying the earth is a spinning globe orbiting the sun, while the moon is orbiting the earth, we are all collectively orbiting the centre of the galaxy, and the sun and moon are also huge spherical masses in space etc.

What do you mean the results have never been replicated? Most college-level physics students will replicate it. There’s hundreds of youtube videos where people have replicated it just go take a look.

The thing with disproving flat Earth isn't a lack of options but rather the opposite. There are so many thousands of experiments and observations that disprove it that you benefit by nailing down the simplest and easiest to recreate ones. Cavendish is like the novice level of gravity investigation. Since Cavendish we have far, far more accurate means and many diverse assortments of experimental device that can measure attraction between masses. So many, they require an entire literature review just to appreciate.

Invited Review Article: Measurements of the Newtonian constant of gravitation, G

By many accounts, the Newtonian constant of gravitation G is the fundamental constant that is most difficult to measure accurately. Over the past three decades,

aip.scitation.org

The thing with these studies is that it we only have access to the ones supporting the globe earth model. Flat earth is completely censored by all major institutions. The big tech companies censor flat earth, where if you try to search for flat earth arguments, it will show you 100 results for flat earth debunked, or posts by mainstream media trying to discredit flat earth. No institution will allow anyone to even suggest something that sounds remotely like flat earth, and doing so results in losing qualifications / funding. The internet is the primary means of public communication and sharing information with the public in today's world, and it is largely centralised around a few big tech companies. By completely censoring and discrediting one view, and promoting the other, it's impossible to have any meaningful scientific discussion. Like when you asked me how does the density theory of gravity account for the 9.8m/s^2, and why do objects go down, I didn't know. I couldn't use a search engine to find an answer, as it would result in the opposite for what I'm looking for. I tried asking flat earth accounts on insta, but a lot of them are banned / shadowbanned and I can't find them. So while the globe earth is allowed freedom of sharing ideas with modern technology which is extremely powerful, as you can have millions of people contributing to the globe model based on an established few hundred years of recorded science, the other model is like hiding underground, with hardly any resources or collaboration in comparison. Regardless of what you think about the shape of the earth, this type of censorship is completely wrong. What kind of communist shit is this? I won't just give in to authorities forcing ideas on me, and as long as they censor flat earth I will support it, even if just for the symbolism behind it.

No we don’t have to see the globe with our eyes to believe it.

Did you see your mother give birth to you first hand? No? So how are you sure that shes really your mother? You just took your parents word for it.

Just consider going to the supermarket and buying canned soup. Do you have evidence that what’s in the can is edible? Do you know how, where and by whom this food was produced? Why are you not afraid of eating it?

Isn’t this entirely irrational? No because you do have evidence how the legal system in your country work. You know that there are regulations on what can be sold as food. You know if whats in that can was harmful to you then a lot of people along the food chain would be punished and they don’t want that.

Our trust in canned food or round Earth for that matter is an entirely reasonable inference from evidence, the evidence that we collected from our sensory input.

Those things are completely different. I can see clearly that I have similar features to each of my parents. But also it would be statistically extremely unlikely, as the hospital staff and many of my family members would need to be involved.
With flat earth, there's only 500 people in history that have been to Earth orbit. These people could have easily been in on it. Because of the centralised nature of the global society, it's easy to control institutions from the top down. I don't know how it works with the space agencies, but look at the WHO, dictating health policy to the entire world about covid. What the WHO says is regarded as fact, and nobody can question them. The IMF and World Economic Forum dictating economic policy to the entire world. For example with the IMF (controlled by Rothschilds), when they give loans to countries such as Pakistan, they have conditions to those loans. Now Pakistan can't act freely, and needs to consider the impact of its actions on the future loans by the IMF. With this mechanism alone they can control the actions of individual countries. Also when you have an establishment which has censored 20 topics in the past, and 20 of them have turned out to be true, it's basic probability theory to assume that whatever they censor next is also true. Look at the other topics they censor / promote: Israel / Palestine, US Banking system and who controls it, LGBT, feminism, BLM, entire Middle East policy, Iran, etc. It's censored by the same people. There's a central authority which communicates to different institutions (such as big tech, media, scientific institutions) the narrative that they want to control.

Lol first of all why is it that NASA is the only space agency that is talked about by the flat earthers. Do you guys not know that there are 72 different space agencies all over the world? Even Indians have a space agency.

View attachment 1428316

And secondly about why they haven’t went back to the moon?

Well, going to the moon is neither easy nor cheap. There's also no immediate return on investment - it was more of a status thing back then when USSR was clearly ahead of USA when it came to space exploration. They had put the first satellite in orbit, the first man in orbit - hell, they put the first woman in orbit in the early 60s (the US wouldn't send a woman into space until the 80s). The US was motivated in the 1960s because they wanted their political and economic system to be seen as the best in the world, and especially better than the alternative that the Soviet Union was offering. This was during the Cold War and such perceptions were seen as very serious business.

So the US was both capable and motivated, and their motivation was to do something nobody else had done to prove they were the best. Nobody else had both the motivation and ability once the US already did it. Something can only be accomplished for the first time once.

In this day, no one else wants to pony up the tens of billions needed to do it when there's not much to gain right now. If we went to another planetary body it’d most likely be Mars and Elon Musk is already on it.

Look up the cost of going to the moon. It's 280 billion in today's money (adjusted for inflation). That is absolutely nothing. It's peanuts. Maybe in Pakistan it's a lot, as Pakistan has a GDP of 263 billion, but the USA has a GDP of 20 TRILLION. Look at how much Tesla as a company is worth: 1 TRILLION. A private company that makes electric cars could afford to go the moon at least three times. And that's with the technologies from the 1960s. Every other technology has gotten better and cheaper, like a shitty phone used to cost a couple thousand dollars in the 90s, now for half the price you can get a phone that's like an alien technology in comparison. So with the moon landing, the cost should now be much less than 280 billion since there's a much longer time gap to the 60s. And the US government just gave out 2 trillion to the public during covid. They gave EACH PERSON 2k and then 1.4k stimulus checks. They gave away 2 trillion but they don't have 200 billion to spend to go back to the moon with today's technology? It's hard to debate the science of flat earth as someone without a scientific background, but these are simple and logical facts. If we went to the moon in 1969 then there's no logical reason we shouldn't be on it right now. Not to mention that they live streamed the moon mission? That sounds like the biggest hoax ever.

 

[Deleted member 14774]

@Salludon btw I asked Eric Dubay (the flat earth youtuber) on insta about the 9.8 thing and he actually replied, this is what he said.

There is a pressure gradient formed by the amount of stacked air/water/land over you in a column which increases the pressure/weight/density the further down you go and that defines direction. And helium balloons fall up, not down, proving there is no downward directional bias:




But I don’t understand it fully so I can’t debunk either theory, but thought you might be interested

 

[Salludon]

About the sun,


Sunsets would work like this on a flat Earth:
[Yes I time stamped it]





This is his whole section from @6:30-13:00 on how the sun and moon work:

Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

A small sun on the surface of Earth would simply recede high in the sky and get smaller and smaller until it fades away. It absolutely would not retain the same angular size and set below the horizon. That’s a fact. No wonder where you are on the Earth.

At 12:15 mark he talks about ‘atmospheric lensing’ and says that the reason we see sun go down is because of water molecules in air. How do all those water molecules that make up around 1% of the atmosphere produce thousand times greater refractive effect then actual liquid water? Explain how this only applies to sun and nothing else? Why does the sun behave this way? Show me a projectile or a plane going below the horizon as it recedes. Have you ever seen a plane in the sky moving away from you and just recedes into the horizon while retaining the same size? Why doesn’t this refraction seem to work on it?

The thing with these studies is that it we only have access to the ones supporting the globe earth model. Flat earth is completely censored by all major institutions. The big tech companies censor flat earth,

“Um yeah we also have scientific studies supporting flat Earth but they are censored by the big bad tech companies”

How convenient.

I can see clearly that I have similar features to each of my parents. But also it would be statistically extremely unlikely, as the hospital staff and many of my family members would need to be involved.

Interesting. And at the same time it doesn’t seem extremely unlikely to you that all governments, space agencies, geologist, physicists, astronomers, pilots, navigators who use spherical Earth to get around, everyone who works in communications technology, architects (since they have to keep in view the curvature of the Earth while making bridges) are all involved in this globe Earth lie.

Also when you have an establishment which has censored 20 topics in the past, and 20 of them have turned out to be true, it's basic probability theory to assume that whatever they censor next is also true.

Name those 20 topics which they censored and which came out to be true.

Every other technology has gotten better and cheaper, like a shitty phone used to cost a couple thousand dollars in the 90s, now for half the price you can get a phone that's like an alien technology in comparison.

You might think that as technology improves space travel becomes cheaper and i suppose it does a little bit, but as nowhere near the same rate as lets say... electronics.

The amount of exotic metals and crazy materials required for space vessels is crazy. That stuff doesn’t get cheaper over time, if anything it gets more expensive.

Even when it comes to cheaper things associated with space travel, standards must be kept higher than pretty much any other project on Earth. One bad O-ring and its all over... You can bet after all the testing and safety that goes into an O-ring NASA uses now, it effectively costs probably 10 or 100x more than the O-rings in your car. Now imagine that attention to detail is applied to EVERY SINGLE THING in the fucking spaceship.

It's hard to debate the science of flat earth as someone without a scientific background, but these are simple and logical facts.

If you had a background in science you wouldn’t be a flat earther.

If we went to the moon in 1969 then there's no logical reason we shouldn't be on it right now. Not to mention that they live streamed the moon mission? That sounds like the biggest hoax ever.

“Most people understood going to the moon as a great adventure. And how many times are they going to pay for it when the plot’s the same every time?” - James Burke, Connections.

NASA’s budget is currently about 0.5% of the federal budget. During the height of the Apollo program that figure was about 5%. You guys make NASA as some evil, rich manipulative agency that is running the world from the shadows but in reality they are begging for funding since they can’t do what they wanna do due to funding constraints.

Each Apollo landing (not mission, landing) cost $20B. To put that into perspective, that’s more than NASA’s entire budget this year alone. NASA’s budget pales in comparison to many other things the government spends money on.

Anyhow, explain to me why there are reflectors on the moon if no one ever went there.

Lunar Laser Ranging experiments - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

It’s used to measure how far away the moon is. According to these measurements, the moon has been moving about 1 and 1/2 inches away from Earth each year.

 

[sytyl]

Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

A small sun on the surface of Earth would simply recede high in the sky and get smaller and smaller until it fades away. It absolutely would not retain the same angular size and set below the horizon. That’s a fact. No wonder where you are on the Earth.

At 12:15 mark he talks about ‘atmospheric lensing’ and says that the reason we see sun go down is because of water molecules in air. How do all those water molecules that make up around 1% of the atmosphere produce thousand times greater refractive effect then actual liquid water? Explain how this only applies to sun and nothing else? Why does the sun behave this way? Show me a projectile or a plane going below the horizon as it recedes. Have you ever seen a plane in the sky moving away from you and just recedes into the horizon while retaining the same size? Why doesn’t this refraction seem to work on it?



“Um yeah we also have scientific studies supporting flat Earth but they are censored by the big bad tech companies”

How convenient.




Interesting. And at the same time it doesn’t seem extremely unlikely to you that all governments, space agencies, geologist, physicists, astronomers, pilots, navigators who use spherical Earth to get around, everyone who works in communications technology, architects (since they have to keep in view the curvature of the Earth while making bridges) are all involved in this globe Earth lie.



Name those 20 topics which they censored and which came out to be true.



You might think that as technology improves space travel becomes cheaper and i suppose it does a little bit, but as nowhere near the same rate as lets say... electronics.

The amount of exotic metals and crazy materials required for space vessels is crazy. That stuff doesn’t get cheaper over time, if anything it gets more expensive.

Even when it comes to cheaper things associated with space travel, standards must be kept higher than pretty much any other project on Earth. One bad O-ring and its all over... You can bet after all the testing and safety that goes into an O-ring NASA uses now, it effectively costs probably 10 or 100x more than the O-rings in your car. Now imagine that attention to detail is applied to EVERY SINGLE THING in the fucking spaceship.



If you had a background in science you wouldn’t be a flat earther.



“Most people understood going to the moon as a great adventure. And how many times are they going to pay for it when the plot’s the same every time?” - James Burke, Connections.

NASA’s budget is currently about 0.5% of the federal budget. During the height of the Apollo program that figure was about 5%. You guys make NASA as some evil, rich manipulative agency that is running the world from the shadows but in reality they are begging for funding since they can’t do what they wanna do due to funding constraints.

Each Apollo landing (not mission, landing) cost $20B. To put that into perspective, that’s more than NASA’s entire budget this year alone. NASA’s budget pales in comparison to many other things the government spends money on.

Anyhow, explain to me why there are reflectors on the moon if no one ever went there.

Lunar Laser Ranging experiments - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

It’s used to measure how far away the moon is. According to the measurements, the moon has been moving about 1 and 1/2 inches away from Earth each year.

I've never seen you get so heated on a subject like this before

 

[Salludon]

I've never seen you get so heated on a subject like this before

I have a lot of knowledge on this subject. I’m a giga spacecel.

 

[LooksDeficiency]

Regardless of what shape the earth is, it's incredible how unifying the statement "the earth is a sphere" is. It immediately gives everyone a reference for the lowest level of being grounded in public opinion

 

[randomuser2407]

Flat Earthers think that there is an ice wall where Antarctica is supposed to be and that there are soldiers from the United Nations protecting it with guns to prevent anyone from reaching the other side. Since Antarctica isn't open to tourists, people come up with wild conspiracy theories about that continent. They think that the ice wall covers the entire planet, which, according to them is a disk, not a sphere.

The reason why some people believe the Earth is flat is because very few people have been to space. It's kind of like the Allegory of the Cave, how can we know that the world we see is real? And not just a fabrication done by the powers that be? I'm not saying that I support the Flat Earth theories, but it does bring up some questions.

Humanity believes what science tells them but what if everything discovered by science was just an illusion meant to keep us in captivity? And if aliens exist, then why have they never visited us? Maybe they have already imprisoned us and now just watch us like visitors in a giant Zoo.

I don't believe in the Flat Earthers but I believe that their theories are fascinating and they make us wonder that maybe there is more to the universe than what we know. Because, if you've never travelled the world, then how do you know that what you see on your screen is real? How can you trust that the news don't lie if you don't have proof? Some scientific discoveries lack as much evidence as religions like Christianity, and yet we believe them to be the truth anyways, but we could be wrong.

 

[Deleted member 14774]

“Um yeah we also have scientific studies supporting flat Earth but they are censored by the big bad tech companies”

How convenient.

Jfl if don’t think that’s a valid reason then you don’t understand the significance.

Interesting. And at the same time it doesn’t seem extremely unlikely to you that all governments, space agencies, geologist, physicists, astronomers, pilots, navigators who use spherical Earth to get around, everyone who works in communications technology, architects (since they have to keep in view the curvature of the Earth while making bridges) are all involved in this globe Earth lie.

Actually one of the big things that made me take flat earth seriously was the videos of pilots, architects, and bridge builders saying first hand how the earth was flat. I would find those for you, but the big bad tech companies censor flat earth. I’m sure you understand.

Name those 20 topics which they censored and which came out to be true.

I just mentioned 7. And by came true, I mean they censor it in one direction, but anybody who looks into these issues (which are nowhere near as complex as flat earth), can see that the reality is the opposite of what they’re censoring. A more recent extreme example of something that actually came true in the real world after they were censoring it, were covid conspiracy theorists who were predicting mandatory vaccine passports and more lockdowns, saying people wouldn’t be able to participate in society without their vaccine passports. I’ve seen people saying this first hand since April 2020, and one by one I’ve seen them be banned for misinformation. And then 16 months later, France, Canada, and some US states have vaccine passports. Austria has announced mandatory vaccination for everyone from February.

You might think that as technology improves space travel becomes cheaper and i suppose it does a little bit, but as nowhere near the same rate as lets say... electronics.

The amount of exotic metals and crazy materials required for space vessels is crazy. That stuff doesn’t get cheaper over time, if anything it gets more expensive.

Even when it comes to cheaper things associated with space travel, standards must be kept higher than pretty much any other project on Earth. One bad O-ring and its all over... You can bet after all the testing and safety that goes into an O-ring NASA uses now, it effectively costs probably 10 or 100x more than the O-rings in your car. Now imagine that attention to detail is applied to EVERY SINGLE THING in the fucking spaceship.



If you had a background in science you wouldn’t be a flat earther.



“Most people understood going to the moon as a great adventure. And how many times are they going to pay for it when the plot’s the same every time?” - James Burke, Connections.

NASA’s budget is currently about 0.5% of the federal budget. During the height of the Apollo program that figure was about 5%. You guys make NASA as some evil, rich manipulative agency that is running the world from the shadows but in reality they are begging for funding since they can’t do what they wanna do due to funding constraints.

Each Apollo landing (not mission, landing) cost $20B. To put that into perspective, that’s more than NASA’s entire budget this year alone. NASA’s budget pales in comparison to many other things the government spends money on.

They have money for whatever they want. Jfl if you think the US just went to the moon and decided they discovered all there is to know, and it would be a waste of money to go there again or stay there. The government is obsessed with science. They have research in things we can’t even imagine.
To go to the moon today, the cost can’t be higher than 280 billion since that’s what it cost in 1969. I think even with a very slow rate of improvement, the same technology shouldn’t cost more than 140 billion. A 50% reduction over 50 years is extremely reasonable. It doesn’t matter what NASA’s budget is, that’s determined by the priorities of the government. And the government just GAVE AWAY 2 trillion. Look at this chart which shows the amount of money in circulation going from 4 trillion in 2020 to 20 trillion

I don’t have a background in science, but I do understand the economy. Watch over the next year, when the government signs more stimulus bills worth trillions of dollars. The amount of money they give away each year will grow exponentially over the next few years. When you see these trillion dollars being created out of nothing (printed into existence), question whether it might be worth using 10% of one of those budgets to go back to the moon and end the flat earth once and for all, and of course also for science and the advancement of the human race or whatever.

 

[chaddyboi66]

Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

A small sun on the surface of Earth would simply recede high in the sky and get smaller and smaller until it fades away. It absolutely would not retain the same angular size and set below the horizon. That’s a fact. No wonder where you are on the Earth.

At 12:15 mark he talks about ‘atmospheric lensing’ and says that the reason we see sun go down is because of water molecules in air. How do all those water molecules that make up around 1% of the atmosphere produce thousand times greater refractive effect then actual liquid water? Explain how this only applies to sun and nothing else? Why does the sun behave this way? Show me a projectile or a plane going below the horizon as it recedes. Have you ever seen a plane in the sky moving away from you and just recedes into the horizon while retaining the same size? Why doesn’t this refraction seem to work on it?

I might not agree with everything they say, but by no means would ever them stupid for having those opinions, regardless of how ridiculous they may see, because they see and test what they believe and often only don't believe in things that mostly use theory like with most modern "high level" Scientism.

There is probably such a great refractive effect on the sun because it's the most radiant object in the sky.

Also, refraction isn't the only the only reason he gives for the sun disappearing into the horizon he just argues that it also contributes to the effect, because the primary reason he argues for this is due to the law of perspective; the object, no matter how high or large, would appear to shrink into the horizon in your view.


An example of this is shown in the same time stamp of the video I gave you with the boat going into the horizon as it recedes from your view, and coming back into you view once you zoom in:

 

[Deleted member 14774]

NASA’s budget is currently about 0.5% of the federal budget. During the height of the Apollo program that figure was about 5%. You guys make NASA as some evil, rich manipulative agency that is running the world from the shadows but in reality they are begging for funding since they can’t do what they wanna do due to funding constraints.

Each Apollo landing (not mission, landing) cost $20B. To put that into perspective, that’s more than NASA’s entire budget this year alone. NASA’s budget pales in comparison to many other things the government spends money on.

Some more interesting info regarding budgets
US spent 2 trillion in Iraq alone (https://www.businessinsider.com/us-taxpayers-spent-8000-each-2-trillion-iraq-war-study-2020-2)
US spent at least 2 trillion in Afghanistan, but some estimate it was closer to 5 trillion.
Pentagon can’t account for 35 TRILLION (https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/pentagon-35-trillion-accounting-black-231154593.html)
35 trillion is fucking insane and people are talking about how Nasa just doesn’t have 200 billion to go back, it’s a waste of money jfl
USA has given 140 billion in aid to Israel, non inflation adjusted so probably like 300 billion in today’s money. What did they gain? Could definitely cover the cost of going to the moon again.

I hope after these you still don’t believe the issue is the budget.

 

[Salludon]

There is probably such a great refractive effect on the sun because it's the most radiant object in the sky.

Not a very convincing argument. Like i said before, you guys have really low standard of evidence for what you want to believe.

There’s no “probably” in the spherical Earth model. You can explain every single phenomenon that occurs on Earth with precision and certainty using 1 model only. While you have a different model to explain seasons and different for night and day and another one to explain the Coriolis effect. Theres just too many inconsistencies and contradictions in your flat earth theory that it’s insane to me how anyone can believe it.

An example of this is shown in the same time stamp of the video I gave you with the boat going into the horizon as it recedes from your view, and coming back into you view once you zoom in:

The reason the boat comes back into the view once you zoom in is *drum roll* because it didn’t went over the horizon.

Let’s make something clear, once a boat sails over the horizon, it cannot be seen anymore, no matter how powerful the optical zoom.

If a distant boat is not visible, then it is because of at least one of these reasons:

1- Our eyes have limited angular resolution and are unable to resolve the ship at that distance.
2- The atmospheric condition is limiting our visibility.
3- The curvature of the Earth obscures the ship.

Zooming improves angular resolution and can reveal the boat if it was not visible due to 1 but not 2 & 3. It is the same reason germs on our hands are not visible although they are right in front of our eyes. A microscope improves angular resolution and can reveal them.

Zooming in cannot overcome the limited visibility imposed by Earth’s atmosphere, and will never see through the curvature of the Earth.

Another thing is, if it were true that all ships that depart can remain persistently visible just by indefinitely increasing the optical zoom… then that would mean that we should be able to see the boat until it reaches the port, and we should even be able to see all the ports on Earth just by zooming in but its obviously not the case.

question whether it might be worth using 10% of one of those budgets to go back to the moon and end the flat earth once and for all

Jfl if you think they’re gonna go to the moon again just to prove Earth isn’t flat. Maybe if all the people on Earth believed it was fake then they might go but flat earth community doesn’t even make up a fraction of the world population.

and end the flat earth once and for all

And who says flat earthers will start believing it this time when they didn’t believe it the first few times? NASA literally live streams Earth everyday from space and you can see it’s not flat but you all call it photoshop and CGI. How are you gonna believe this time when the CGI technology is 100s of times more sophisticated then the past.

35 trillion is fucking insane and people are talking about how Nasa just doesn’t have 200 billion to go back, it’s a waste of money jfl

Yeah NASA don’t. Government does. NASA is just an agency of the government not the whole government. Like i said you might think $200B is nothing but NASA’s yearly budget is like $20B. Make the government increase its budget and NASA would have no problem going to the moon again.


Btw you didn’t answer my question about the reflectors on the moon.