Search results

Let's just say that I don't buy it. Maybe it's true but I doubt it. The centrifugal force is just not big enough. Gravity vs. Centrifugal Force

Sorry JR, I'm with Dave on this point. The Mississippi River does not run uphill in the way you're suggesting. The centrifugal force caused by the Earth's rotation is only something like .03% of the force of gravity. Not nearly enough to cause the effect you are suggesting. The overall course...

Dave, If the Earth is flat, why isn't the Chicago skyline visible from across Lake Michigan all the time? It's plenty big enough and plenty tall enough to remain visible for hundreds of miles across a flat earth, but most of the time (nearly all of the time) it isn't visible at all.

The video linked to in my last post gives my proposed experiment new life! Now I just have to figure out how to pay for the equipment I'd need to pull it off. I'll also have to figure out how to convince someone to help me with it without making myself sound like a complete lunatic! :kookoo:

I found another video the debunks the flat earth theory. It's the best one I've seen yet when it comes to just really great, straightforward arguments as well as excellent production quality. This video is the first in a series of videos on the subject but this one focuses on the horizon and...

This argument has already been directly refuted. Objects do not simply get so far away that they can no longer be seen because they've shrunk into the distance. They disappear from the bottom up over the horizon just as you'd expect them to do if the world was a sphere. If the world were flat...

This is the beginning of an argument that is not rational. There are dozens, perhaps hundreds, of articles, youtube videos and other sources that one can find in seconds with a google search that directly addresses the Van Allen Belts (there's more than one) but you won't believe any of them...

I already said that everyone knows the river flow downhill, GENERALLY SPEAKING. But, if you know the name of a river that has no portion of it that ever flows up and over a rock or small hill or other uphill portion of any length of time or distance at all, give me the name of it. (Such a river...

I brought up why boats float because you brought up density and buoyancy. A buoy float, not because of the density of the stuff it's made of but because it displaces a sufficient weight of water. There is NO buoyancy without gravity. You were accepting the concept of buoyancy while rejecting...

Well, a lot of them really are crazy but that certainly isn't the point I was trying to make. Everyone knows that, generally speaking, rivers flow downhill. Everyone also knows that rivers occasionally encounter a section along their path that is somewhat uphill and that it flows over it anyway...

Gravity in action! I wonder how the flat-earth "density and buoyancy" folks explain how siphons work? The water in the tank is the same density as the water in the siphon and yet it flows up hill! One might be tempted to suggest that they work because of pressure differentials but that's only...

Up to this point, I'm with you 100%. There is no question that the thrust of what you said here is true. Atheistic science turns to gravity to explain all kinds of things that I've never thought made any sense whatsoever. They have indeed turned gravity into a sort of god. They complain that we...

That was a cool episode of a very cool show but it's not as counter-intuitive as you might think. If one car (C) is smashed against a solid wall at speed S, then a certain amount of total damage (D) is created (C*S = D). Damage per car: (D/C = X) If one car (C) is smashed against a solid wall...

Saying it doesn't make it so, Dave. The force we call gravity exists, whether you like it or not. The force itself is quite well understood even if it's cause isn't. There have been calculations done that tell you precisely how fast the Earth would have to spin to counteract the force of gravity...

No, Dave. The way you debunk the notion that water would have to run up hill in order for it to flow north is to simply state the notion to anyone who isn't stupid. The way you debunk the idea the surveyors don't take the curvature is the Earth into account is to give counter examples where the...

Dave, the videos you've posted too are all a bunch of irrational nonsense. I spent considerable time debunking the first couple of dozen, so called "arguments" from that video with 300 reasons to believe in a flat Earth. All three hundred of them are ridiculous! How is it even possible to make a...

"The Bumpy but Mostly Flatish Earth Society" doesn't roll off the tongue very nicely, does it?

He's just making the arguments, Michael. He hasn't gone as far over the edge as it seems! (Flat earth - over the edge - see what I did there?) :chuckle:

There is no contradiction. While it is more accurate to call it an oblate spheroid, the terms can be used interchangeably on a practical level because the oblateness is very slight. The Earth is almost perfectly round and, in fact, is close enough to perfectly round that it is perfectly...

If you limit yourself to that then I doubt you'll ever be convinced. The Earth is, in fact, a very large sphere and your senses are not capable of directly sensing curvature (or anything else) on that scale. You're like the ant that insists that the entire world consists of his tunnels and a 300...