[_ Old Earth _] Where Did the Idea of a Flat Earth Originate?

[Jacks Bratt]

I am well aware of numbers being squared for use in various formulae but you are quite ignoring what I have been saying. Any unit multiplied by that same unit, results in that unit². A clear example is the one you just gave 32ft/s². How do you think it became s²? Because the time unit s was multiplied by the time unit s. In many equations units get multiplied and divided, and that effects what the resulting units will be.

A number squared with or without a unit does result in a larger number but once units are involved, the units get squared. Units play a huge role in math, physics, chemistry, etc., because that is precisely how one comes up with things like ft/s or ft/s². Formulae express certain information and relationships symbolically; it's how scientists know what information is being stated and how the result applies.


That has nothing to do with what we at discussing.


0.31574886 miles or 1667.1539808 ft. You'll notice that agrees exactly with the diagram you gave, the very one that gives the trig functions for figuring it out.

Use your way for 2000 miles, 3000 miles, and 3959 miles.

So we are arguing over decimal places. I say 1666.666, you say 1667.1539. ft... Your math is just using 8.00233872 inches instead of 8 inches

Do you really want to quibble over such discrepancies? I mean, really? A half a foot difference over 50 miles. Seriously?

In actual fact, your math shows more of a curve than mine. It only reinforces the fact that some things that are visible to us, over a flat surface, should actually be even FURTHER beyond the curve of the earth. They should be even further beyond our ability to see them.

If you extend the distance to 2000 miles, 3000 miles and 3959 miles, the drop would be even greater using your method. So, let's use your math, to build a car engine and mine to dig a post hole...It's only a matter of accuracy to within 1/2 foot over 50 miles.

I'm sorry but if you still want to say my math doesn't work, you're not going to hurt may feelings.....

 

[Free]

So we are arguing over decimal places. I say 1666.666, you say 1667.1539. ft... Your math is just using 8.00233872 inches instead of 8 inches

Do you really want to quibble over such discrepancies? I mean, really? A half a foot difference over 50 miles. Seriously?

In actual fact, your math shows more of a curve than mine. It only reinforces the fact that some things that are visible to us, over a flat surface, should actually be even FURTHER beyond the curve of the earth. They should be even further beyond our ability to see them.

If you extend the distance to 2000 miles, 3000 miles and 3959 miles, the drop would be even greater using your method. So, let's use your math, to build a car engine and mine to dig a post hole...It's only a matter of accuracy to within 1/2 foot over 50 miles.

I'm sorry but if you still want to say my math doesn't work, you're not going to hurt may feelings.....

Good to know I'm not going to hurt your feelings then because your math most certainly doesn't work.

You asked me to provide my number for 50 miles, and I did. I have asked you to provide numbers for 2000, 3000, and 3959 miles but you don't. Why is that?

Once you provide those numbers, I'll provide mine and we'll see just whose math we'll build a car engine with.

 

[Mustard Socks]

Just to clarify for my own information. Are there some here who are actually arguing the earth is flat?

 

[Free]

Just to clarify for my own information. Are there some here who are actually arguing the earth is flat?

No. Jacks Bratt is just giving us flat-earther arguments but he doesn't believe the earth is flat. We do have a flat-earther on the forums but he hasn't posted in the thread.

 

[Douglas Summers]

See, this is exactly what I mean... "one can not go round and round on a flat earth"...

You state this yet do not think. You can, in fact, go round and round on a flat earth. If you took the time to actually have some respect for your opponent in this debate, you would take a look at what they are saying and suggesting.

Satan said to God, your creation of man on earth are so gullible and prideful that I can get them to believe the earth is flat, even though they know it is round, and even more, I will get them to worship the thoughts of a crippled and speechless man while rejecting your creating power. . And God said, go sow your deceit in pride and discourse and see who follows after your rebellious fiat of creation, for my people will not be so persuaded. But all of the gullible who follow after your deceit are your children.(1 John 3:9-11) (John 8:44)..not mine. (Job 1:6-12) (2 Cor. 2:11)

• 3. Satan’s Part in God’s Perfect Plan | Bible.org
  https://bible.org/seriespage/3-satan-s-part-god-s-perfect-plan
  
  Satan’s Part in God’s ... nor submissive to God. He challenges ... already learned from the Book of Job: God uses Satan in His plan to achieve His sovereign ...
  The assault on the Born again believer has never been so world wide since Rome, and the world is ravaged by the enemies of God, and Jesus has called us out to preach the gospel to complete His body. But we are discussing whether the world is flat!!!!!

Christ in me
Douglas Summers

 

[Jacks Bratt]

Just to clarify for my own information. Are there some here who are actually arguing the earth is flat?

No, and contrary to "Free" we are arguing over the correct calculation for the curve of the earth.
For instance, if you were on a beach, on an ocean, and there is an Island 50 miles away, how far below the curve is the shore of the Island?
That is what we are arguing.
Free says that it would be 1667.1359 feet, I say that it is 1666.6667 feet. Due to the discrepancy of 1/2 of a foot over a distance of 50 miles, Free says my math is wrong.

That is our argument.

Also, I have questions that do not fit the globe earth and questions that don't fit the flat earth. That is my stance as a globe believer.
Is it OK to question things such as this? Or, should I blindly believe in either or blindly condescend someone elses' beliefs with out investigating their claims with an open mind?

 

[Jacks Bratt]

Satan said to God, your creation of man on earth are so gullible and prideful that I can get them to believe the earth is flat, even though they know it is round, and even more, I will get them to worship the thoughts of a crippled and speechless man while rejecting your creating power. . And God said, go sow your deceit in pride and discourse and see who follows after your rebellious fiat of creation, for my people will not be so persuaded. But all of the gullible who follow after your deceit are your children.(1 John 3:9-11) (John 8:44)..not mine. (Job 1:6-12) (2 Cor. 2:11)

• 3. Satan’s Part in God’s Perfect Plan | Bible.org
  https://bible.org/seriespage/3-satan-s-part-god-s-perfect-plan
  
  Satan’s Part in God’s ... nor submissive to God. He challenges ... already learned from the Book of Job: God uses Satan in His plan to achieve His sovereign ...
  The assault on the Born again believer has never been so world wide since Rome, and the world is ravaged by the enemies of God, and Jesus has called us out to preach the gospel to complete His body. But we are discussing whether the world is flat!!!!!

Christ in me
Douglas Summers

Can you show me the chapter and verse where Satan said that man is so gullible that they will believe that the earth is flat?

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

That is not at all a good explanation as it explains literally nothing. The Bible says the earth is a circle and it also says it has four corners. Either it is a circle or a rectangle. There is simply no way it can be both. Adding in a rectangular table is to say that something other than the earth is rectangular, which is not what the Bible says.


First, an 8 inch drop per mile has nothing to do with a ramp; it was by definition the drop in view due to the curvature of the earth. Second, a curve is not necessarily exponential. A constant radius, such as that with a sphere, like the earth, is not exponential precisely because it is constant. The term exponential not only means having to do with an exponent but that it is ever increasing. An exponential curve is constantly increasing and as such has no radius. So there is no basis for which any number in this case must be squared. Third, the link you gave confirms a small number, although the methodology is suspect. Fourth, light refracts, so it is possible that is why we can see farther. Fifth, if the earth was flat, one should be able to stand on the east coast of North America and with a telescope, be able to see Africa and Europe, but one cannot because the earth is a sphere.

A corner does not have to have a sharp edge to it.
A person could describe an area in Italy and say, "it is a charming corner of Italy".
It is synonymous with district, area, region, section, quarter, part, and informally "neck of the woods".
If one wants to insist it is a sharp edge and force that belief onto others, it can hardly be considered as truth.

 

[Jacks Bratt]

Good to know I'm not going to hurt your feelings then because your math most certainly doesn't work.

You asked me to provide my number for 50 miles, and I did. I have asked you to provide numbers for 2000, 3000, and 3959 miles but you don't. Why is that?

Once you provide those numbers, I'll provide mine and we'll see just whose math we'll build a car engine with.

OK here it is:
2000 x 2000 x 8 / 12 = 2666666.66667 ft. or 505.05 miles
3000 x 3000 x 8 / 12 = 6000000.00 ft or 1,136.36 miles
3959 x 3959 x 8 / 12 = 10,343,814 ft or 1959.05 miles

 

[Free]

OK here it is:
2000 x 2000 x 8 / 12 = 2666666.66667 ft. or 505.05 miles
3000 x 3000 x 8 / 12 = 6000000.00 ft or 1,136.36 miles
3959 x 3959 x 8 / 12 = 10,343,814 ft or 1959.05 miles

Good. Now my numbers:

@2000 miles: 542.323 miles
@3000 miles: 1375.653 miles
@3959 miles: 3959 miles

A few things to note: 1) The further we get from our viewpoint, the greater the discrepancy; 2) My numbers exactly match the diagram you provided on the previous page; 3) At 3959 miles, the failure of your math is most clear, as we don't even need math to know that it should be 3959 miles. At 3959 miles out, the drop in view will be the point tangent to surface of the earth, which is equal to the radius.

Do you see it now? For relatively short distances your math gives us a decent enough approximation, but it will not work for larger distances. But that is really neither here nor there, as no one is going to be calculating such things at those distances, if ever at all. It's been a fun thinking exercise anyway.

 

[Mustard Socks]

No, and contrary to "Free" we are arguing over the correct calculation for the curve of the earth.
For instance, if you were on a beach, on an ocean, and there is an Island 50 miles away, how far below the curve is the shore of the Island?
That is what we are arguing.
Free says that it would be 1667.1359 feet, I say that it is 1666.6667 feet. Due to the discrepancy of 1/2 of a foot over a distance of 50 miles, Free says my math is wrong.

That is our argument.

Also, I have questions that do not fit the globe earth and questions that don't fit the flat earth. That is my stance as a globe believer.
Is it OK to question things such as this? Or, should I blindly believe in either or blindly condescend someone elses' beliefs with out investigating their claims with an open mind?

Excellent! Thank you for your patience in clarifying those particulars.

 

[Douglas Summers]

Can you show me the chapter and verse where Satan said that man is so gullible that they will believe that the earth is flat?

No Particular verse exactly, but many examples of gullibility and by the wiles of the Devil. (Gen. 3:1-13). Gullible men do not believe in Scriptural creation and many other works of God. One would have to be a born again believer to understand the Spirit of Scripture. I'am more concerned about the completion of the one new man and God's will in our life.

 

[Mustard Socks]

No. Jacks Bratt is just giving us flat-earther arguments but he doesn't believe the earth is flat. We do have a flat-earther on the forums but he hasn't posted in the thread.

I did not know about the FE member. Thank you. Interesting theory in its own right though if you're a fan of Sci-Fi genre. Which I am. Thanks again.

 

[Jacks Bratt]

Good. Now my numbers:

@2000 miles: 542.323 miles
@3000 miles: 1375.653 miles
@3959 miles: 3959 miles

A few things to note: 1) The further we get from our viewpoint, the greater the discrepancy; 2) My numbers exactly match the diagram you provided on the previous page; 3) At 3959 miles, the failure of your math is most clear, as we don't even need math to know that it should be 3959 miles. At 3959 miles out, the drop in view will be the point tangent to surface of the earth, which is equal to the radius.

Do you see it now? For relatively short distances your math gives us a decent enough approximation, but it will not work for larger distances. But that is really neither here nor there, as no one is going to be calculating such things at those distances, if ever at all. It's been a fun thinking exercise anyway.

Yes, it has been a fun thinking exercise. And, I agree, the larger the distance, the larger the discrepancy. As I explained, the discrepancy in my math is the 8 inches part. This is a single digit and not precises. For my use, in my posts, it was for calculations of whether an object should be visible or not, due to the curve of the earth. For this, my math works just fine.

Thanks for the agreement that "no one is going to be calculating such things at those distances". Like I said, the tolerances for digging a post hole compared to a car engine are different even thought the math for both is correct.

 

[Free]

Yes, it has been a fun thinking exercise. And, I agree, the larger the distance, the larger the discrepancy. As I explained, the discrepancy in my math is the 8 inches part. This is a single digit and not precises. For my use, in my posts, it was for calculations of whether an object should be visible or not, due to the curve of the earth. For this, my math works just fine.

Thanks for the agreement that "no one is going to be calculating such things at those distances". Like I said, the tolerances for digging a post hole compared to a car engine are different even thought the math for both is correct.

But you are still not understanding the finer points of what I have given. The math is correct for me, not for you. It isn't a matter of precision on the 8" because, as I showed, the discrepancy between our numbers is always increasing--the error is constantly getting worse the further out we go. That means the 8" accuracy is not a matter of decimal places; those decimals will always be changing.

You said at the very top of this page that "Your math is just using 8.00233872 inches instead of 8 inches," but that isn't exactly true. It will only ever be 8.00233872 for exactly 50 miles out. But that number will be different if we're 5 miles out, if we're 100 miles out, 1000 miles out, etc.

We then also see that at 3959 miles, the math you have used utterly fails. I know that this formula may be all over the Internet, but it's wrong. My only point has been not about the accuracy, just that the math isn't correct.

 

[Jacks Bratt]

No Particular verse exactly, but many examples of gullibility and by the wiles of the Devil. (Gen. 3:1-13). Gullible men do not believe in Scriptural creation and many other works of God. One would have to be a born again believer to understand the Spirit of Scripture. I'am more concerned about the completion of the one new man and God's will in our life.

I agree, "Gullible men do not believe in Scriptural creation and many other works of God.". What if, (and this has been put to me by a strong Christian bible believer,) the globe is the deception and the flat earth is the truth? What If?

Think about that. If the earth is, in fact, a snow globe, with a dome and is God's foot stool. If the sun and moon orbit this dome and the stars are fixed in the canopy.... Do you realize what that would do to the world view of "aliens" from other planets, an invasion of interplanetary beings?
I firmly believe that the beings that many call "aliens" are demonic. There are no other planets with life. There are no other "civilizations". There is no worry of "asteroids" colliding with earth. None of this is biblical.

If the earth was proven to be flat, the powers of this world, the lies of Satan, would all disappear like reruns of Gilligan's Island as they would be impossible.
We would be left with the only option... God created us.
I'm not saying it is, as I have too much to investigate and work out. However, if it was, the bible would rule without opposition. The Bible would clear it all up.

 

[Douglas Summers]

I firmly believe that the beings that many call "aliens" are demonic. There are no other planets with life. There are no other "civilizations". There is no worry of "asteroids" colliding with earth. None of this is biblical.

Yes, I agree. But we know the world is round as are all other planets. or gravity and other astrophysics could not exist as it does if it were flat. A flat earth could not rotate and fit the Pi = 2.141596 formula for space travel. Beside, we have pictures of the planets.

 

[Jacks Bratt]

But you are still not understanding the finer points of what I have given. The math is correct for me, not for you. It isn't a matter of precision on the 8" because, as I showed, the discrepancy between our numbers is always increasing--the error is constantly getting worse the further out we go. That means the 8" accuracy is not a matter of decimal places; those decimals will always be changing.

You said at the very top of this page that "Your math is just using 8.00233872 inches instead of 8 inches," but that isn't exactly true. It will only ever be 8.00233872 for exactly 50 miles out. But that number will be different if we're 5 miles out, if we're 100 miles out, 1000 miles out, etc.

We then also see that at 3959 miles, the math you have used utterly fails. I know that this formula may be all over the Internet, but it's wrong. My only point has been not about the accuracy, just that the math isn't correct.

Like I said, I am no mathematician. I do know that for all intents and purposes, my math works just fine to raise questions as to things that are visible on this globe that should not be visible,due to the curvature of the earth.

If you want me to say you are right and I am wrong, due to the accuracy and deviation of my simplistic, although applicable, equation, then OK I give. You are right, I am wrong.

I have made the grave error of agreeing with people like this:
You use the Pythagorean theorem. If you are at a point P on the earth's surface and move tangent to the surface a distance of 1 mile then you can form a right angled triangle as in the diagram. Using the theorem of Pythagoras a2 = 39632 + 12 = 15705370 and thus a = 3963.000126 miles. Thus your position is 3963.000126 - 3963 = 0.000126 miles above the surface of the earth. 0.000126 miles = 1252800.000126 = 7.98 inches. Hence the earth's surface curves at approximately 8 inches per mile.

Note that the person presenting this states "approximately" 8 inches per mile. This is the point of the error in my calculation. A sphere cannot have a curve of a certain number of units per mile that changes as the distance increases. The curve of a sphere is constant. If I were able to find the exact curve per mile, I could calculate it by squaring the distance. Not for area but for the exponential increase in the curve.

Here are three methods that can be used to calculate the magic number. Check this site. They show Zetetic Astronomy, Pythagorean Theorem and Trigonometry. http://flatvsround.blogspot.ca/2015/10/how-to-calculate-earths-curvature.html

 

[Jacks Bratt]

Yes, I agree. But we know the world is round as are all other planets. or gravity and other astrophysics could not exist as it does if it were flat. A flat earth could not rotate and fit the Pi = 2.141596 formula for space travel. Beside, we have pictures of the planets.

Yep, I totally understand. Yet, how do you explain this. These examples are perplexing. How can they be true on our globe? What is up here?

The Dunkerque Light in southern France at an altitude of 194 feet is visible from 28 miles away. Spherical trigonometry dictates that if the Earth was a globe with the given curvature of 8 inches per mile squared, this light should be hidden 190 feet below the horizon

The salt flats at Salar de Uyuni in Bolivia are 100 miles wide at one point and they are totally flat. You can see from one shore to the other

The light at Cape Hatteras is seen at such a distance (40 miles) that, according to theory, it ought to be nine-hundred feet higher above the level of the sea than it absolutely is, in order to be visible

The Statue of Liberty in New York stands 326 feet above sea level and on a clear day can be seen as far as 60 miles away. If the Earth was a globe, that would put Lady Liberty at an impossible 2,074 feet below the horizon!

The Notre Dame Antwerp spire standing 403 feet high from the foot of the tower with Strasburg measuring 468 feet above sea level. With the aid of a telescope, ships can be distinguished on the horizon and captains declare they can see the cathedral spire from an amazing 150 miles away. If the Earth were a globe, however, at that distance the spire should be an entire mile, 5,280 feet below the horizon!

“In the account of the trigonometrical operations in France, by M. M. Biot and Arago, it is stated that the light of a powerful lamp, with good reflectors, was placed on a rocky summit, in Spain, called Desierto las Palmas, and was distinctly seen from Camprey, on the Island of Iviza. The elevation of the two points was nearly the same, and the distance between them nearly 100 miles. If the earth is a globe, the light on the rock in Spain would have been more than 6600 feet, or nearly one mile and a quarter, below the line of sight.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (59)

 

[Douglas Summers]

Yep, I totally understand. Yet, how do you explain this. These examples are perplexing. How can they be true on our globe? What is up here?

The Dunkerque Light in southern France at an altitude of 194 feet is visible from 28 miles away. Spherical trigonometry dictates that if the Earth was a globe with the given curvature of 8 inches per mile squared, this light should be hidden 190 feet below the horizon

The salt flats at Salar de Uyuni in Bolivia are 100 miles wide at one point and they are totally flat. You can see from one shore to the other

The light at Cape Hatteras is seen at such a distance (40 miles) that, according to theory, it ought to be nine-hundred feet higher above the level of the sea than it absolutely is, in order to be visible

The Statue of Liberty in New York stands 326 feet above sea level and on a clear day can be seen as far as 60 miles away. If the Earth was a globe, that would put Lady Liberty at an impossible 2,074 feet below the horizon!

The Notre Dame Antwerp spire standing 403 feet high from the foot of the tower with Strasburg measuring 468 feet above sea level. With the aid of a telescope, ships can be distinguished on the horizon and captains declare they can see the cathedral spire from an amazing 150 miles away. If the Earth were a globe, however, at that distance the spire should be an entire mile, 5,280 feet below the horizon!

“In the account of the trigonometrical operations in France, by M. M. Biot and Arago, it is stated that the light of a powerful lamp, with good reflectors, was placed on a rocky summit, in Spain, called Desierto las Palmas, and was distinctly seen from Camprey, on the Island of Iviza. The elevation of the two points was nearly the same, and the distance between them nearly 100 miles. If the earth is a globe, the light on the rock in Spain would have been more than 6600 feet, or nearly one mile and a quarter, below the line of sight.” -Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (59)

I do not believe math always is exact. The Atlantic and Pacific oceans are at different elevations, but water should seek it's own level. There is a reason for this, having to do with density and specific gravity. There are many phenomenons that do not have logical answers. The bending of light can cause a lot of odd and scientific infractions of Newton's Law.