North - South

[sturgeon]

Another "hoax" here;

But it moves! How we know the Earth rotates. – Starts With A Bang

All you need is a pendulum.

[Saros]

By the way, let's pretend I believe that the Earth is flat. What exactly would it change for me? Nothing, I guess. Does it really matter what I think about the Earth's shape when my life doesn't depend on it. I am not an astronaut or anyone who can use this knowledge for some practical purpose. Most people don't even care about this. It is all the same to them if the Earth is flat, concave, convex, triangular or a hologram. They would still have to live their lives the way they usually do with or without this additional trivia information.
By the way, let's organize and go to the ice rim. Why no one has done that? It might be fun. You can take some nice photos and show the world the Earth is flat. We can also save 50 million $ and fly into space. I just don't understand why this issue should be important at all, if none of us depend on it.

[cikljamas]

Also...Some Astronauts have come out and said that...aliens are real.

yet none of them have ever said...the earth is flat.

Kinda funny when you think about it.

This is really funny, so funny that i can't even laugh on that, because i can't decide is it funnier than regrettable or other way around...

OK, fair enough. Now explain to me how if this is indeed true it proves that the Earth is flat? It doesn't. None of that proves the Earth is flat. It is possible that science is wrong about certain things, but this has to be proven, you know. If you can prove that you might even win a Nobel Prize in physics. By the way, there are experiments proving it spins, but you think they are a hoax. I agree there seems to be no videos showing the Earth spin convincingly though. Also for some reason most videos who supposedly show the Earth from space appear to be CGI. But once again it doesn't prove the Earth is flat. Unless you have better evidence, I don't see how you can prove anything. It is just words and your opinion. The truth is that since you cannot go to space and check yourself you gotta believe in something, but you cannot be certain if you're right. I might be wrong too, but I don't see evidence the Earth is flat, therefore I prefer to stick to the current model even though some aspects of it seem suspicious, at least it is functioning well and explains stuff.

It is possible.

See experiment 8

If you were right we should see in reality what is presented in figure 20. , if i was right we should see in reality what is presented in figure 19. , and if Wild Heretic was right then we should see in reality some very unusual spectacle which would be in accordance with what we see in figure 20, but this time that sight would be turned upside down..

Which would be the case?

Saros, one idea has just crossed my mind: have you ever watch airplanes that fly high in the sky in sunset? Have you noticed the glow (reflection of the sun from polished aluminium body of planes) ? Now, if the Earth is round and turns on it's axis, wouldn't we be able to see that same bright shine (reflection) at least 5 or 10 minutes after sunset, wouldn't it be some sight, bright shiny airplane bodies in dark sky?

Why never anyone could witness such a glowing sky, shining by tens of "midnight suns" in the areas where air traffic is frequent?

Another "hoax" here;

But it moves! How we know the Earth rotates. – Starts With A Bang

All you need is a pendulum.

Here we go again...

By the way, let's pretend I believe that the Earth is flat. What exactly would it change for me? Nothing, I guess. Does it really matter what I think about the Earth's shape when my life doesn't depend on it. I am not an astronaut or anyone who can use this knowledge for some practical purpose. Most people don't even care about this. It is all the same to them if the Earth is flat, concave, convex, triangular or a hologram. They would still have to live their lives the way they usually do with or without this additional trivia information.
By the way, let's organize and go to the ice rim. Why no one has done that? It might be fun. You can take some nice photos and show the world the Earth is flat. We can also save 50 million $ and fly into space. I just don't understand why this issue should be important at all, if none of us depend on it.

I have referred to that question several time over in this thread. Don't you remember what were my answers on that?

If you want to be a scientist in these fraudulent times, you first have to obtain university certificate of graduation degree of lying skills...

If they can spit at our faces such a dirty lies then they can do whatever they like:

BBC Journalist Thinks That The 9/11 Hijacker's Passports Fell To Earth AFTER Crash

A clean glove often hides a dirty hand.
English Proverb

The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than a small one. A. Hitler

The trouble with lying is that your lie changes slightly with each telling.
Rene

There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof
against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting
ignorance — that principle is contempt prior to investigation.
Herbert Spencer

So, you say, nothing would change? If you only knew how you are terribly wrong!

[Saros]

So, you say, nothing would change? If you only knew how you are terribly wrong!

OK, please tell me what will change. I can't think of anything. This is just some information. About the airplanes, I let you know what I think a bit later.

[cikljamas]

OK, please tell me what will change. I can't think of anything. This is just some information. About the airplanes, I let you know what I think a bit later.

The belief that the Earth is rotating on an "axis" and orbiting the sun is THE GRANDADDY OF ALL DECEPTIONS IN THE WORLD TODAY...

Launched from its modern founder's deathbed in 1543, the Copernican Revolution ushered in a movement that has totally reshaped and re-directed ALL of man's knowledge (See Below Article: Exposing The Copernican Deception: The Cataclysmic Impact On Every Field Of Modern Man’s Knowledge)

The Christian Bible (and the Koran!) declare the earth to be motionless. The mathematical Copernican model says the earth rotates on an "axis" (at over 1000 MPH) orbits the sun (at 30 times rifle bullet speed), and is whooshing around a galaxy (at 250 times rifle bullet speed) .....all at the same time.

Over the centuries, superstars in the physical sciences established the Copernican model as an unchallenged fact. This success paved the way for conquest of the biological sciences (Darwin et al). This transvaluation of values and philosophy (Nietzsche et al) then quickly spread to the social and behavioral sciences (Marx, Freud et al), to mathematics (Einstein et al), the Arts (Picasso et al), Education (Dewey et al), and so on through today's media reinforcement of all of the above. ..As the 21st Century gets its feet wet, man's "knowledge" is almost totally secularized and the Bible all but ignored as the source of absolute Truth from God Himself. ..The "sciences" reign supreme, and they do so because of the victory of Copernicanism over the Bible's motionless earth.

In his preface to the creationist textbook Biology: A Search for Order in Complexity, John N. Moore says that “true science” requires that the data “simply be presented as it is,” and that “a philosophic viewpoint regarding origins” cannot be science.

One prominent geocentrist, astronomer and computer scientist James N. Hanson, shows more candor. In a public lecture, he said of non-geocentric astronomers, “They lie a lot.” Charles K. Johnson, president of the Flat Earth Society, is absolutely vehement about scientific dishonesty. He regularly calls scientists “liars” and “demented dope fiends” and claims that the entire space program is a “carnie game.”
Unlike most Christians, Bible-Scientists insist that if conventional science is true, the Bible must be false. Flat-earther John Hampden put it plainly: “No one can believe a single doctrine or dogma of modern astronomy, and accept Scriptures as divine revelation.”

Since flat-earthism is the paradigm of Bible-Science, it should be discussed first. It’s difficult to see how the scientific creationists, some of whom claim to discern the laws of thermodynamics in the Bible, can fail to see its flat-earth implications.

While the Bible doesn’t flatly state the shape of the earth, it repeatedly says in plain Hebrew that the earth is immovable.




In addition to all that, being men and women of sound mind (II Tim. 1:7), Creationists should be eager to learn that:

1) No one–not Copernicus, not Kepler, not Galileo, not Newton, not Einstein–absolutely no one has proven the earth to be moving.

2) The earth moves only thru abstract, abstruse, and esoteric mathematics invented to make it move.

3) Over 200 truly scientific experiments using real mathematics have shown no earth movement, and these had the science establishment in a panic from the 1880′s until Einstein came to the rescue in 1905 with his “relativity” hypothesis.

4) Relativity is pure claptrap and there isn’t a person reading this who can’t know that fact.

5) Foucault’s Pendulum, the Coriolis Effect, and geostationary satellites do not prove a moving earth.

6) Anyone can see that the results of the Michelson-Morley experiments–especially the light fringe results–prove a stationary earth; and other facts about eclipses, satellite re-positionings, alleged blinding earth speeds, gravitational hooey, etc., add to the proof. Moreover, the Big Bang Baloney, the growing awareness of the effect of Dark Matter on galactic speeds, parallax factors which shrink the cosmos, the evidence for speed-of-light retardation, the behavior of reflections and their capabilities for producing phenomena regarding size and depth, etc., all combine to corroborate the certitude of a greatly sanforized universe.

"It's amazing to me that truth seekers can take an historical approach to the Armenian Genocide, 9/11, moon shots, the holocaust, etcetera and do good work uncovering evidence of what would have to be termed important deceptions with potentially wide consequences while, at the same time, judge it to be impossible or unimportant to take an historical approach which reveals that the same culprits driving these deceptions are deceiving the entire world by controlling and manipulating the theoretical science establishment. This demonstrable control has almost destroyed Bible-based Western Civilization's morals, ethics, and just plain truth with its Big Bang Model of 15 billion years of evolution of the universe, Earth, and mankind. Modern man's foundational "knowledge" ( the Origin of all that exists ) has been usurped by the anti-Bible, anti-Christ Pharisee Religion with their "creation scenario" which destroys the Bible's "creation scenario" and destroys all Bible credibility right on through Jesus and Heaven...which is their motive.

Copernicanism, in short, is a concept that is protected in a bunker under a 50 foot thick ceiling of solid “scientific” concrete. It is meant to be impregnable. It is a concept that has become ensconced in men’s minds as the indestructible cornerstone of enlightened modern man’s knowledge. Virtually all people everywhere have been taught to believe–and do believe–that this concept is based on objective science and dispassionate secular reasoning, now long since freed from religious superstitions based on the Bible.

Indeed, it was this Copernican heliocentricity concept that gradually broke the back of Bible credibility as the source of Absolute Truth in Christendom. Once the Copernican Revolution had conquered the physical sciences of Astronomy and Physics and put down deep roots in Universities and lower schools everywhere, it was only a matter of time until the Biological sciences launched the Darwinian Revolution.

This embrace of Darwinism then quite predictably emboldened increasingly secular-minded mankind to further reject Biblical Absolutism and replace its teachings with yet more new “truths” in areas of learning having to do with economics and government. Thus was unsuccessful and floundering Marxism given new life. Marx openly tried to dedicate his own books to Darwin, exulting: “You have given me the basis for my system”. Thus, the “Social Science” disciplines were born and began to make their contributions to the destruction of Bible credibility…

Darwin, of course, only popularized evolutionism with his book in 1859, giving it a supposed mechanism thru natural selection and mutations, both since demonstrated to be utter nonsense. The actual roots of the evolutionary concept can be traced back to antiquity…as indeed can the roots of Copernican heliocentricism.

Thanks, however, to Newton’s invented math and the excesses of his gravitational hypotheses (HERE), Copernicanism dug in its heels in the universities in the 1700’s, and by the last quarter of that century had produced a large crop of hard core heliocentrists, not a few of whom were advocating ape-man theories (amongst them, Darwin’s grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, Voltaire’s disciples in France, etc.). This was the age of “The Enlightenment” which produced Thomas Paine, the celebrated pamphleteer of the American Revolution, whom George Washington referred to as “that filthy little atheist”. Thomas Jefferson’s and Ben Franklin’s Deism was commonplace in Europe as well as amongst the rebellious American colonies. During the French Revolution of the 1790’s the Bible was actually outlawed.

http://www.energeticforum.com/254728-post33.html

[Saros]

The belief that the Earth is rotating on an "axis" and orbiting the sun is THE GRANDADDY OF ALL DECEPTIONS IN THE WORLD TODAY...

Thank you very much for your thorough reply. However, I still don't get it how the daily lives of ordinary people would change. If it is true what you're saying that it is all a big lie, that would be indeed revolutionary, but wouldn't it only affect the establishment and not the ordinary people? Additionally, I don't see how the idea that the Earth could be stationary automatically proves the Earth is flat. It can be stationary and a sphere at the same time, can't it? Anyway, there is no evidence in support of your claims. None of the experiments listed prove flat Earth, even if we consider them valid, they only prove the Earth doesn't spin. It sounds interesting, could be hypothetically true, but where is the evidence for flat Earth? We can't just switch to flat Earth based on no evidence, can we? Moreover, even in the bible(not that this is really relevant) it doesn't say the Earth is flat, as far as I know there is no information about its shape, so the idea of flat Earth doesn't even come from there. On top of that all major churches accept the current model. So here is your problem, you are saying the Earth is flat just because you suspect the Earth doesn't move and the heliocentrism is wrong. I don't see how the first follows from the other.

[cikljamas]

@ Saros, your trolling is nearing to the end...

Let me show you what a troll you really are:

This is post #7 written and published long time ago (page 1)

You are too lazy to click the links? Sorry, but it can't be my fault!

Being very well aware of your laziness, i even very often paste snapshots of different texts and pictures...

Here, two more snapshots for you and your indolent friends:





Just a few posts back - in post #153 i have asked you this:

See experiment 8

If you were right we should see in reality what is presented in figure 20. , if i was right we should see in reality what is presented in figure 19. , and if Wild Heretic was right then we should see in reality some very unusual spectacle which would be in accordance with what we see in figure 20, but this time that sight would be turned upside down..

Which would be the case?

But, since you are unable to click links HERE IS EXCERPT AND SNAPSHOT OF EXPERIMENT NUMBER 8:



I have no doubts about your ability to avoid even these snapshots, it's the story of opening/closing eyes, you remember - post #144?

All about these, and about many other experiments you could read in Wild Heretic's texts and precise description of all of them you can easily find in Rowbotham's "Earth not a Globe", but for some "mysterious" reasons (which are not mysterious at all) you talk as if you have never heard about them...

Well, just keep on pretending as much as you wish, i can't help you about that, i rest my case...

And from time to time try to work this out:

Saros, one idea has just crossed my mind: have you ever watch airplanes that fly high in the sky in sunset? Have you noticed the glow (reflection of the sun from polished aluminium body of planes) ? Now, if the Earth is round and turns on it's axis, wouldn't we be able to see that same bright shine (reflection) at least 5 or 10 minutes after sunset, wouldn't it be some sight, bright shiny airplane bodies in dark sky?

Why never anyone could witness such a glowing sky, shining by tens of "midnight suns" in the areas where air traffic is frequent?

[ewizard]

Okay I spent about 2 minutes skimming this entire thread. I don't think it's worth my time to spend more but I've got one thing to say. It appears you think the Earth is flat. First thought that came to mind was a number of kids I've seen who sent cameras up in weather type balloons to very high altitudes and then either had pictures transmitted back to them or used GPS on the setup to recover them when they come back to Earth. I've seen pictures from them and they are high enough to see the Earth is obviously a sphere. There are so many reasons your flat Earth idea is nonsense I won't spend any more time on it. There are thousands of amateur astronomers with backgrounds in astrophysics who would all have to be lying on the astronomy forums if this was true. Try visiting one of those forums and getting real facts if you last long enough before they laugh you off or ban you. Sorry guy but you are just plain wrong on this.

[Saros]

@ Saros, your trolling is nearing to the end...

Let me show you what a troll you really are:

This is post #7 written and published long time ago (page 1)

You are too lazy to click the links? Sorry, but it can't be my fault!

Being very well aware of your laziness, i even very often paste snapshots of different texts and pictures...

I am about to stop responding to this thread. You're giving me links to Rowbotham's book, and that should be enough to convince me the Earth is flat? I am sorry, but I am sure if Parallax lived nowadays he wouldn't quote from his book either. He lived in the 19th century, aviation didn't exist back then, space travel didn't exist. It is ridiculous you're trying to convince me by linking to an author who lived in the 19th century and never had a chance to use modern-day equipment to actually test his claims scientifically. Furthermore, apparently the books can be interpreted anyway you want, that is why Wild Heretic uses them to prove a totally different idea. This is a forum, and you cannot prove stuff by asking me to read books which, by the way, are obsolete. Many things have changed in the meantime, so it is funny you refer to this. Just think about it any passenger plane flies higher than the balloons from the 19th century. In short, technology and science have developed a lot during the last 100-150 years, and it is impractical to quote from books written in the 19th century when the topic is technology or science related. It is just obsolete. You don't even seem interested in testing your claims, you just like to believe it is true.

Almost forgot, about the airplanes, that is wrong. Airplanes don't fly in space to be seen as glowing suns! At an altitude of 10 km where they usually fly, 15 minutes or so after sunset, the sun doesn't shine either, so what are you actually talking about? In fact you can see the airplanes after sunset for a short period of time glowing in the sky. You cannot see them glowing when it gets completely dark though, because at their altitude the Sun is no longer visible either.

[cikljamas]

Okay I spent about 2 minutes skimming this entire thread...

@ Great wizard, 2 minutes skimming and you absolved all of it, some wizard, no doubt...

I am about to stop responding to this thread. You're giving me links to Rowbotham's book, and that should be enough to convince me the Earth is flat? I am sorry, but I am sure if Parallax lived nowadays he wouldn't quote from his book either. He lived in the 19th century, aviation didn't exist back then, space travel didn't exist. It is ridiculous you're trying to convince me by linking to an author who lived in the 19th century and never had a chance to use modern-day equipment to actually test his claims scientifically. Furthermore, apparently the books can be interpreted anyway you want, that is why Wild Heretic uses them to prove a totally different idea. This is a forum, and you cannot prove stuff by asking me to read books which, by the way, are obsolete. Many things have changed in the meantime, so it is funny you refer to this. Just think about it any passenger plane flies higher than the balloons from the 19th century. In short, technology and science have developed a lot during the last 100-150 years, and it is impractical to quote from books written in the 19th century when the topic is technology or science related. It is just obsolete. You don't even seem interested in testing your claims, you just like to believe it is true.

Almost forgot, about the airplanes, that is wrong. Airplanes don't fly in space to be seen as glowing suns! At an altitude of 10 km where they usually fly, 15 minutes or so after sunset, the sun doesn't shine either, so what are you actually talking about? In fact you can see the airplanes after sunset for a short period of time glowing in the sky. You cannot see them glowing when it gets completely dark though, because at their altitude the Sun is no longer visible either.

So, we have brand new excuse (worst of all up until now), the book has been written in 19th century, and that is the issue, and the fact that nobody since 19th century till these days could prove that contrary is the case, that fact doesn't bother you at all...

Do you read once in a while your own words after you write them down?

Let me help you:

At an altitude of 10 km where they usually fly, 15 minutes or so after sunset, the sun doesn't shine either, so what are you actually talking about?

Very next sentence:

In fact you can see the airplanes after sunset for a short period of time glowing in the sky.

How can you see airplanes after sunset for a short period of time glowing in the sky if the sun doesn't shine after sunset?

The true fact is that you can see airplanes after sunset glowing in the sky only within short period of time while on the surface of the Earth is still twilight, but as soon as twilight turns to dark, you can't see nothing of that kind (reflection of the airplane which fly in high altitudes) any more....

You should work it out much better than that...

[Saros]

@ Great wizard, 2 minutes skimming and you absolved all of it, some wizard, no doubt...


So, we have brand new excuse (worst of all up until now), the book has been written in 19th century, and that is the issue, and the fact that nobody since 19th century till these days could prove that contrary is the case, that fact doesn't bother you at all...

Do you read once in a while your own words after you write them down?

Let me help you:



Very next sentence:



How can you see airplanes after sunset for a short period of time glowing in the sky if the sun doesn't shine after sunset?

The true fact is that you can see airplanes after sunset glowing in the sky only within short period of time while on the surface of the Earth is still twilight, but as soon as twilight turns to dark, you can't see nothing of that kind (reflection of the airplane which fly in high altitudes) any more....

You should work it out much better than that...

Look what I said

Almost forgot, about the airplanes, that is wrong. Airplanes don't fly in space to be seen as glowing suns! At an altitude of 10 km where they usually fly, 15 minutes or so after sunset, the sun doesn't shine either, so what are you actually talking about? In fact you can see the airplanes after sunset for a short period of time glowing in the sky. You cannot see them glowing when it gets completely dark though, because at their altitude the Sun is no longer visible either.

Apparently, you're the one who can't read. I said that you can see them for a short period of time while the Sun is still shining at their altitude(up to 15 minutes or so after the sunset observed on the surface, later the sun doesn't shine so you stop seeing them). They are at 10 km, remember, the horizon is a bit farther away as you go up. What else do you expect? Of course you won't be able to see them when it is completely dark. Am I talking to a two-year old? You started coming up with ludicrous arguments, I am tired of this nonsense. About the book, of course people have refuted the claims. If they haven't we would believe in flat Earth now. I am seriously surprised you keep arguing about the validity of the experiments. You call this common sense, I call it living in the past, refusing to grow up and accept the world has moved on. Your strategy is simple: deny everything as a hoax, claim the only true experiments are the ones you have picked, and since everything is a hoax and the experiments from the 19th century are correct, therefore the Earth is flat. Congratulations, you can't convince even a child with logic like that. Anyway, I don't really care what you believe in as it is totally irrelevant, and as I said has no practical value whatsoever. If I decide to go to the South Pole one day, I might consider the Flat Earth theory more seriously, till then for all practical purposes the convex model works just fine, and the evidence is more than enough.

[cikljamas]

Saros, i am sure that you are older than 2 years old kid, but i am not sure if you can apprehend something that you don't want to admit as a truth no matter what...

Look at this:



After i finished my last post i walked out the house (it was 30 min. after sunset) and there was still twilight, then i looked up in the sky which wasn't cloudy and it becomes very obvious to me that if some airplanes would flew over and above me at high altitudes i wouldn't be able to see reflection of sunlight, and even if it was 15 min. after the sunset it would be the same thing - the same impossibility.

What does this mean?

It means that the sun fade away gradually and evenly above (at high altitudes) and below (at the surface of the Earth), and it also means that it would not be the case if the surface of the Earth would be rotund.

Maybe this can help you to understand what i am talking about:



It's about simple geometry and spinning of supposedly rotund Earth, give yourself time to (grow up) ponder on that carefully, don't infer so hastily...

But as fully grown adult (at least older then 2 years old kid) you made up your mind even before you start to think about it, didn't you?

As usually...

[Saros]

Please instead of posting here to me showing your confusion regarding how the world functions, go and ask some real scientist and argue with them or better if you want you can take a university astronomy course, because it seems you don't care about what is already known, you're trying to re-invent scientific concepts. Your friend Rowbotham didn't have a chance to fly in space or even at an altitude of 10 km, so why should I even consider his observations seriously. In the 19th century a lot of things were not discovered yet, so he didn't know any better. However, in the 21st century, even I have much more relevant observations of the Earth, as I have flown on a plane many times at an altitude of 10-11 km. But I guess there is no point to tell you that, because you won't listen, as you're stubborn and it is easier for you to disregard the whole world than actually try to understand simple science. Moreover, don't try to convince me, but the scientific world. I am in no position to defend any model and it is not up to me.

EDIT: in my opinion his diagrams are grossly exaggerated, he shows a curvature which is not seen from such a low balloon altitude, he probably does that to make his point which is wrong. The Earth is huge and has a circumference of 40,075 km, you can't see any curvature, because you're not high enough, not because the Earth is flat! It is like being 0.1 mm above a basketball and attempting to see the curvature. Drawing diagrams where you can see a curve is misleading(i.e. the diagrams are not drawn to scale!), the Earth is not a ball with a circumference of 100 km to be able to see the curvature from an altitude of 3 kms, you gotta go higher.

By the way, you cannot see the curvature from a regular plane because planes fly at an altitude ~10-11 km, but you could slightly see it from a Concorde which usually flew above 15 km up to 17 km. There are many people who have witnessed this.

My Aviation

[cikljamas]

...even I have much more relevant observations of the Earth, as I have flown on a plane many times at an altitude of 10-11 km. Moreover, don't try to convince me, but the scientific world. I am in no position to defend any model and it is not up to me.

EDIT: The Earth is huge and has a circumference of 40,075 km, you can't see any curvature, because you're not high enough, not because the Earth is flat! It is like being 0.1 mm above a basketball and attempting to see the curvature. Drawing diagrams where you can see a curve is misleading(i.e. the diagrams are not drawn to scale!), the Earth is not a ball with a circumference of 100 km to be able to see the curvature from an altitude of 3 kms, you gotta go higher.

By the way, you cannot see the curvature from a regular plane because planes fly at an altitude ~10-11 km, but you could slightly see it from a Concorde which usually flew above 15 km up to 17 km. There are many people who have witnessed this.

My Aviation

The real truth about nonexistent curvatures of the Earth is shown in this video

The hoax of refraction and angular declination of the horizon

The law of vision

Now, something very interesting:

Can you give one undisputable answer to: "Is the earth round, and how do we prove it." Because we are having a debate in my class, and the teacher kept saying 'the earth is flat' And I have to give him one undisputable answer.

Giving the answer to above question answerer wrote down whole bunch of stupid and filthy lies, one among which is this dirty lie:

(2) If you climb higher, you can see further. On top of a mountain or lighthouse, or in an airplane, you can see things that are invisible -- below the horizon -- when you are on the ground. For example, if you watch the Sun set, and at the very moment when the Sun is just below the horizon you climb quickly up a hundred feet, you will see the Sun again. It is hard to explain why you can see further when you climb higher unless the Earth's surface curves downward away from you wherever you stand.

Now, let suppose that above dirty lie is not a lie at all, but a holly truth.

First of all we have to emphasize words CLIMB QUICKLY UP.

He didn't say LIFT QUICKLY UP, but CLIMB QUICKLY UP.

So, how fast the fastest man in the world can climb up to 10th floor (which would be equivalent for 100 feet = 30 m height) ?

Nobody can climb up to 10th floor below 1 minute.

But, let say that Superman can climb up twice faster than that which would be 30 seconds per 30 meters, or 1 sec. per 1 meter.

According to above rate of speed of climbing it would take for Superman to climb up to the height of 10 km 495 minutes = 8,25 hours!

It we apply above calculation to my "airplane-sunset-glow" example we have to conclude that we should see reflection of sunlight from airplane which fly at 10 km altitude 8,25 hours after sunset!

But let suppose that when liar said CLIMB UP he actually meant LIFT UP...

Today, almost all elevators use one of two types of AC motors: the most common are geared motors for elevators moving at speeds up to 500 feet per minute (153 m per minute)

So 10 000 meters / 153 (per minute) = 65,35 minutes

So, even if CLIMB UP should have meant LIFT UP, we should according to above filthy lie see reflection of sunlight from airplane at 10 km altitude more than hour after sunset...

Nobody ever saw such a spectacle...did you?

Secondly, if you want to refute Rowbotham's arguments you should provide exact (counter) mathematical calculations instead of using pure demagogy which has no value (or meaning) whatsoever...

[Saros]

Now, something very interesting:

Can you give one undisputable answer to: "Is the earth round, and how do we prove it." Because we are having a debate in my class, and the teacher kept saying 'the earth is flat' And I have to give him one undisputable answer.

Giving the answer to above question answerer wrote down whole bunch of stupid and filthy lies, one among which is this dirty lie:



Now, let suppose that above dirty lie is not a lie at all, but a holly truth.

First of all we have to emphasize words CLIMB QUICKLY UP.

He didn't say LIFT QUICKLY UP, but CLIMB QUICKLY UP.

So, how fast the fastest man in the world can climb up to 10th floor (which would be equivalent for 100 feet = 30 m height) ?

Nobody can climb up to 10th floor below 1 minute.

Cikljamas, what you wrote is just pure nonsense. Do you really not understand what was meant by the example? They mean that from a higher altitude you see farther, and that is why you could still see the Sun!!! You don't have to literally climb. He just compares the horizon range from different altitudes at the same time, if you're at 0 metres you will see the Sun disappear let's say at 6 pm, if you were at 3000 meters you would see it disappear for example at 6.20 pm and so on, if you don't get that and are still acting like a clown, I cannot help you. Your question about the climbing was totally laughable,as the issue is not about how fast you can climb. Have you heard of the term abstract thinking or perhaps you cannot imagine stuff, and that is why you cannot grasp simple concepts? Please review what you have written without being blind, and if you wish write back.