Real Science

[Remy Lebeau]

This thread will cover various subjects of scientific intrigue brought to the attention of the 2nd grade class at Freehold Elementary School for the Saved. It would seem like the current hot topic is the Theory of a Spherical Earth versus the Reality of a Flat Earth. So that is where we will start.

Today's Topic: The Theory of a Spherical Earth versus The Reality of a Flat Earth.

What do Christian students think?






Graphics by: Randal Huntington and Chad McNally
Text by: Richard Mortimer (with help from Mrs. Cleveland)
I would like to thank Mrs. Cleveland's entire 2nd Grade class for their inputs. They truly deserve their recognition as an honor class.

It is so simple even a child can see the absurdity of the Spherical Earth Theory. Next time: I'll be asking the 3rd grade class about the Theory of Atoms vs the Reality of God's Creation Clay.

[djarvis201]

Re: Real Science

wow...
creation clay... vs. the Atomic theory...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
you are one intelligent person!

[BelieverInGod]

Re: Real Science

Amazing work brother, unfortunately the liberals will mock you because they want to see you back on the stoop drinkin a 40.

I thank Jesus that you have raised yourself to such an honored status in our community

[recent_convert]

Re: Real Science

Seeing as no-one else is going to refute this ridiculous notion of 'Real Science', I'll bite.
Apologies for the long post, but it is unavoidable in this case.

What do Christian students think?

[ATTACH]16051[/ATTACH]

If this is the best Christian students can think, I think I can see why Christian Scientists are not highly regarded as a reliable source of wisdom.

A simple test to totally disprove A,B and C:
Take a small ball or balloon and draw 2 dots in diametrically opposite positions.
Draw a straight line around the circumference from dot to dot (consider these as 'top' and 'bottom'.
Shine a light source onto the ball so one side of the ball is illuminated.
Turn down other lights so the light source is visible
Align the ball so the line is vertical then rotate it so the line turns left to right.
Watch the line pass from 'night' to 'day' at the same rate across the whole ball.

As a second test, slightly tilt the 'top' towards the light source and rotate again (still turning around the axis of the dots)
This will show both the seasons and the FACT that the poles have 3 months of continuous day and night.

Why would latitude have anything to do with aging?
Time passes at a rate of 1 second every 1 second. Why would changing the number of seconds in one day have any effect on the aging process? (Note, I am not contradicting myself here, just pointing out an error of your own logic)



As the Earth is spinning, it carries us with it. All movements we make which we can see and experience are relative to the Earth's rotation.



Temperatures on the Earth is determined by a number of factors, including wind speed and direction, ocean currents and altitude.
Merely being 'higher' doesn't increase temperature because of the 'trapping' effect of the atmosphere. The so-called greenhouse effect is a real phenomena, which keeps heat near the surface of the Earth. (I don't believe the hysteria of increasing CO2 blah blah blah by the way).

Water retains heat very well, but takes a lot of energy to warm up. So the oceans warm coastal areas in the winter and keep them cool in the summer.
Ocean currents transfer heat around the globe, such as the Gulf Stream carrying warm water from the gulf of Mexico across Britain, Sweden and into Archangel, Russia.



I realise that this is a crude and not to scale map, but its still completely detached from reality.

For example, Vietnam has a land border with China. If you don't believe that, ask any of the tens of thousands of US GI's who over 20 years lost a war against a bunch of farmers.
Also, the distance between Alaska and Russia via the Bering Strait is a mere 53 miles - your map have them nearly as far apart as any 2 places possibly can be.
Russia and Europe share a land border - ask any student of history how both Napoleon's and Hitler's armies were broken at the peak of their power.
Why is the Sahara Desert near the edge of the Earth, rather than nearer the middle?
Land borders: Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan. If this were not the case, why would the Taliban leadership have moved from Afghan to Pakistan when NATO took over? And how would Iranian army specialists (such as mortar teams) have assisted the Taliban.
Why is New Zealand so close to Russia?

A question on this map, what do compasses point to?

As for the Sun only providing 20% heat, how come on a warm spring day the temperature drops dramatically when the Sun passes behind a cloud?


Finally, I would urge you to take your 3rd grade students to a real school which teaches a proper curriculum so they can learn about how the world really is instead of being spoon-fed out-of-date nonsense from an ancient tome. If everyone followed the tenets contained within the bible, there would be no progress at all.
Think about the implications for a moment - all we eat is what we can find growing or can catch for meat.
No progress means no attempt to find cures for disease. People would still die from the common cold. Remember this the next time you or your loved ones are ill in bed, or have a broken bone.
No progress means no construction, so the only places to live out of the wind and rain would be a cave. Also, no fire to warm up with - its discovery was the original progress!
That's even before we consider the progress with mechanization and electricity.

As to the title of this thread, Real Science is conducted with an open mind, many different groups are involved with each experiment and all results are scrutinized by the scientific community.
@Remy - If you are so certain about the validity of your position, why don't you publish your findings with a scientific journal? All you will need to do is provide a summary along with your method and how you drew your conclusions from the data. You will then have a proper discussion with accredited PhD's which will no doubt prove enlightening.

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Real Science

If this is the best Christian students can think, I think I can see why Christian Scientists are not highly regarded as a reliable source of wisdom.

A simple test to totally disprove A,B and C:
Take a small ball or balloon and draw 2 dots in diametrically opposite positions.
Draw a straight line around the circumference from dot to dot (consider these as 'top' and 'bottom'.
Shine a light source onto the ball so one side of the ball is illuminated.
Turn down other lights so the light source is visible
Align the ball so the line is vertical then rotate it so the line turns left to right.
Watch the line pass from 'night' to 'day' at the same rate across the whole ball.

As a second test, slightly tilt the 'top' towards the light source and rotate again (still turning around the axis of the dots)
This will show both the seasons and the FACT that the poles have 3 months of continuous day and night.

Why would latitude have anything to do with aging?
Time passes at a rate of 1 second every 1 second. Why would changing the number of seconds in one day have any effect on the aging process? (Note, I am not contradicting myself here, just pointing out an error of your own logic)

Thank you for proving the Christian perspective.

Recall the differences in circumfrence. Pulled out into a straight line, the circumfrence of the equator is longer than the upper and lower latitudes.

POLE . 0 MILES

MIDWAY_________________________ 500 miles

EQUATOR __________________________________________________ 1000 miles

So you expect me to believe that someone driving across each of these at 42 mph will complete each in 24 hours? You think they will cross the finish line simultaneously? That defies logic and reason.

See, if the Earth was a sphere there would be temporal incongruities in the space-time continium or everyone would have to shrink toward the poles seeing that 500 miles would be 1000 miles at the midway. There are no temporal abnormalities nor do things get smaller farther away from the supposed equator. Everyone goes by a 24hr day. People on the equator do not age slower.

Furthermore, there are no actual poles. I will not argue against a negative. The "poles" are a ice wall encircling the earth that hold up the firmament. Example: As the earth slowly spins like a record (more like 0.000000001 mph vs some ridiculous 1000 mph) the Sun's light, like a flashlight, simply misses the east and north, while reaching the west and south walls in its path across the Earth. Then later on the slow spin of the earth eventually positions things so that the west and south walls don't get light, but the east and north do. Although it more like north/west to west/south to south/east to east/north back to north/west.

Therefore your argument not only supports a flat Earth, but is wholely invalid. Don't feel too bad kiddo. I've been debating for years. Welcome to the big leagues, rookie.

[ATTACH]16052[/ATTACH]

As the Earth is spinning, it carries us with it. All movements we make which we can see and experience are relative to the Earth's rotation.

So now treadmills don't work... oh, wait! They do!!!

[ATTACH]16053[/ATTACH]

Temperatures on the Earth is determined by a number of factors, including wind speed and direction, ocean currents and altitude.
Merely being 'higher' doesn't increase temperature because of the 'trapping' effect of the atmosphere. The so-called greenhouse effect is a real phenomena, which keeps heat near the surface of the Earth. (I don't believe the hysteria of increasing CO2 blah blah blah by the way).

If heat were trapped it wouldn't get cooler at night. Thank you. Try again.

It is obvious that Hell keeps things bearable while the Sun is on the bottom of the Earth.

Water retains heat very well, but takes a lot of energy to warm up. So the oceans warm coastal areas in the winter and keep them cool in the summer.
Ocean currents transfer heat around the globe, such as the Gulf Stream carrying warm water from the gulf of Mexico across Britain, Sweden and into Archangel, Russia.

The oceans are cooler!!! People get in water to cool off, you idiot!

[ATTACH]16054[/ATTACH]

I realise that this is a crude and not to scale map, but its still completely detached from reality.

Yes, it is very crude so why are you arguing that it is not a perfect display? The kids cut up the map and did the best they could. I'm surprised you can't figure out what the map is supposed to represent. Guess you're not all that smart afterall.

A question on this map, what do compasses point to?

Hell is south. The ice wall is North. West and East are the absence of North and South. They are relative.

As for the Sun only providing 20% heat, how come on a warm spring day the temperature drops dramatically when the Sun passes behind a cloud?

20% was a number the kids came up with. It's just an example. I think it's between 40 - 60%. Ill have to check with our Creation Geologists.

Finally, I would urge you to take your 3rd grade students to a real school which teaches a proper curriculum so they can learn about how the world really is instead of being spoon-fed out-of-date nonsense from an ancient tome.

Oh, you aren't being spoon-fed secular garbage in your secular schools??? You're a hypocrite!!!

If everyone followed the tenets contained within the bible, there would be no progress at all.
Think about the implications for a moment - all we eat is what we can find growing or can catch for meat.
No progress means no attempt to find cures for disease. People would still die from the common cold. Remember this the next time you or your loved ones are ill in bed, or have a broken bone.

Lies. Christians discovered all that stuff with Jesus's help.

Here another perspective. If everyone was Christian there would be no disease, we wouldn't need farms and Jesus would give us homes of heavenly construction. No need for the secular theory of electricity as Jesus would provide The Light™ and Power™.

@Remy - If you are so certain about the validity of your position, why don't you publish your findings with a scientific journal?

Since when do Christians go to atheists for validation? Atheists? Really? Ha! That den of liars? Are you serious?

Why don't your secular scientist come before a panel of Creation Scientist in order to validate their supposed discoveries?

[wait_what]

Re: Real Science

Since when do Christians go to atheists for validation? Atheists? Really? Ha! That den of liars? Are you serious?

Why don't your secular scientist come before a panel of Creation Scientist in order to validate their supposed discoveries?

All I can say is AMEN!

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[recent_convert]

Re: Real Science

Thank you for proving the Christian perspective.

Recall the differences in circumfrence. Pulled out into a straight line, the circumfrence of the equator is longer than the upper and lower latitudes.

POLE . 0 MILES

MIDWAY_________________________ 500 miles

EQUATOR __________________________________________________ 1000 miles

So you expect me to believe that someone driving across each of these at 42 mph will complete each in 24 hours? You think they will cross the finish line simultaneously? That defies logic and reason.
See, if the Earth was a sphere there would be temporal incongruities in the space-time continium or everyone would have to shrink toward the poles seeing that 500 miles would be 1000 miles at the midway. There are no temporal abnormalities nor do things get smaller farther away from the supposed equator. Everyone goes by a 24hr day. People on the equator do not age slower.

Did you even bother with the simple test before you refuted what I never actually said?
As a simpler test, get a small ball (a baseball is fine) and rotate it in your hands.
Notice anything about how you don't get any "temporal incongruities in the space-time continuum"? And yet the ball as a whole twists at the same rate, but at different speeds at different points.

Or how about taping 2 pens to a ruler, one at one edge, the other in the middle so holding the ruler horizontally points the pen tips straight down.
Hold the pen-less end of the ruler and turn it through 360 degrees. This will draw 2 concentric circles. One will have double the radius of the other so will have a considerably longer circumference. But both will have been drawn at the same time!
People working at or near the poles do use a 24hr day, but they can use whichever timezone they want because the Earth's tilt keeps the poles in or out of sunlight for months at a time.
Where did you get 42mph from? Or did you just use a random number as an example?

Furthermore, there are no actual poles. I will not argue against a negative. The "poles" are a ice wall encircling the earth that hold up the firmament. Example: As the earth slowly spins like a record (more like 0.000000001 mph vs some ridiculous 1000 mph) the Sun's light, like a flashlight, simply misses the east and north, while reaching the west and south walls in its path across the Earth. Then later on the slow spin of the earth eventually positions things so that the west and south walls don't get light, but the east and north do. Although it more like north/west to west/south to south/east to east/north back to north/west.

The poles do exist - there are in fact lots of poles: (this link is to scientificamerican.com, not a porn/drugs/paedo site)

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-earth-has-more-than-one-north-pole

As to your 'flashlight moving across the world in a clockwise direction' idea, why do all days average out to 12hr light/12hr dark across the whole year? Your idea would mean an average of 6hr light/18hr dark.
Another question which I've posed in another thread and not got an answer for is: 'What is a year?' Years are mentioned in the bible on numerous occasions, but what is it defined as in your model?
Secular science teaches its the time taken for the Earth to make one complete orbit of the Sun. But if the Earth doesn't move and the sun makes days and nights happen, what is a year?

Therefore your argument not only supports a flat Earth, but is wholely invalid. Don't feel too bad kiddo. I've been debating for years. Welcome to the big leagues, rookie.

Your argument is full of holes and doesn't make sense. Mine is comprehensive and answers more than just the one question asked. Oh, and it completely contradicts a flat Earth.
You are no big league, more a schoolboy looking longingly at minor league and desperately saying anything trying to break through.

So now treadmills don't work... oh, wait! They do!!!

Indeed they do, and the running band still moves relative to the Earth.

If heat were trapped it wouldn't get cooler at night. Thank you. Try again.

Most heat is trapped by the clouds, which is why it gets colder after a clear day without clouds.

It is obvious that Hell keeps things bearable while the Sun is on the bottom of the Earth.

So by your logic, without hell life couldn't exist. What happened before Lucifer was exiled?
And you stated earlier the Sun rotates in a clockwise direction across to top of the world. Contradiction!!!

The oceans are cooler!!! People get in water to cool off, you idiot!

Thats my point - the air is warmed a lot faster, and cools a lot faster, than the oceans. So of course the water is cooler than the air at the hottest point of the day.

Hell is south. The ice wall is North. West and East are the absence of North and South. They are relative.

During the Cold War, both the US and USSR's ICBM strategy involved flying ICBM's over the Northern polar ice cap to hit each other. Also, the nuclear launch submarines hid under the polar ice caps, while being hunted by the smaller (non-launch) subs.

20% was a number the kids came up with. It's just an example. I think it's between 40 - 60%. Ill have to check with our Creation Geologists.

Please do.

Oh, you aren't being spoon-fed secular garbage in your secular schools??? You're a hypocrite!!!

Thats one way of looking at it, except the ideas which I have learnt about make sense, are repeatable, and are corroborated by photos and videos which show a spherical Earth.
All you creationists can do is show passages out of a 2000 year old book, show paintings, pictures of a clip from 'Pirates of the Caribbean 3', adverts from travel companies which contradict your own models (warm, sunny days on the edge anyone?).
Yes, I have spent a large amount of time reading through some of the other threads, and I'm using the examples given from "Scientific Proof the World is Flat" thread. I notice they even contradict what you say (north pole in middle or edge?)
The main difference is that I believe what I do because there is real evidence for it. If you can show me a picture which doesn't look obviously photoshopped (and I'm quite good at spotting the signs) then I will start to believe you.

Lies. Christians discovered all that stuff with Jesus's help.

Here another perspective. If everyone was Christian there would be no disease, we wouldn't need farms and Jesus would give us homes of heavenly construction. No need for the secular theory of electricity as Jesus would provide The Light™ and Power™.

Really? Jesus (who died around the year 31AD) helped people invent an X-ray machine? Modern tractors or combine harvesters?
Like Jesus gave us power until less than 200 years ago? Or was that the work of Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison?
I realise that the Bible teaches that Jesus could cure disease with a touch, but is that the same as saying there would be no disease today? Or is that statement an extrapolation with no basis in scripture?

Since when do Christians go to atheists for validation? Atheists? Really? Ha! That den of liars? Are you serious?

Why don't your secular scientist come before a panel of Creation Scientist in order to validate their supposed discoveries?

Because if you owned a Ferrari, would you take it to a second-rate garage to be serviced? Thought not

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Real Science

Did you even bother with the simple test before you refuted what I never actually said?

As a simpler test, get a small ball (a baseball is fine) and rotate it in your hands.

Notice anything about how you don't get any "temporal incongruities in the space-time continuum"? And yet the ball as a whole twists at the same rate, but at different speeds at different points.
Blah blah blah illogical idiocy deleted

What makes you think that spheres do not create temporal anomalies? You just proved that they do. Just because you are too big to notice the space-time shifts that the baseball creates does not mean they are not present. Why are you ignoring the fact that time would have to be moving faster the further you go up or down from the so-called equator?

Let me break it down for you.

1.) If 500 miles is crossed in 24hrs and 1000 miles is being crossed in 24hrs, they cannot be moving at the same speed.
2.) 500/24 = 20.8333mph
3.) 1000/24 = 41.6666mph
4.) Now recall you just said that the equator of the baseball and the midway point toward the poles are both going full circle simultaneously and AT THE SAME TIME!!!! Therefore, the SAME SPEED!!!
5.) Going at 41.6666 mph the midway latitude would have a 12 hour day!!! Yet that is not the case.

So tell me, how can Pelly Bay, Canada and Cancun, Mexico both have 24 hour days, be in the same time zone and have the sun over them at the same time while taking the world longer to rotate 360 degrees to reach Cancun again verses a smaller distance to rotate 360 degrees from Pelly Bay back to Pelly Bay????? A temporal distortion in the space-time continuum is the only way that could happen.

But people do NOT age any faster or slower depending on latitude. Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that the world is not a sphere as spheres naturally create temporal disturbances across their surface.

The poles do exist - there are in fact lots of poles: (this link is to scientificamerican.com, not a porn/drugs/paedo site)

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...one-north-pole

Why do you think that linking to a site that agrees with you somehow helps your position? So if I link to a site that says the earth is flat will you then believe me? Because if that’s all it will take to convince you of the truth, that would be a lot quicker than wasting my time going back and forth with you.

As to your 'flashlight moving across the world in a clockwise direction' idea, why do all days average out to 12hr light/12hr dark across the whole year? Your idea would mean an average of 6hr light/18hr dark.

Never said the sun moved clockwise. That’s a straw man argument.

I said the world rotates like a slow record and the sun cuts across at a diagonal angle favoring (for example) South to East. The sun goes over and under the Earth. The FAR REACHES of the North to West sides won’t get any sun until the “record” finally rotates over to East/North, then North/West. At which point South/East will be in perpetual night. Get it now?

Another question which I've posed in another thread and not got an answer for is: 'What is a year?' Years are mentioned in the bible on numerous occasions, but what is it defined as in your model?

12 full moons, 12 new moons, when the record rotates full circle; Take your pick. It was later standardized by seasonal changes and the current 12 month system. Different cultures have had different criterion throughout the ages.

Indeed they do, and the running band still moves relative to the Earth.

The running band is stationed on a flat stationary base. If you stand on a treadmill you will move with the band, but if you jump you will not because it will move underneath you. Just as the Earth would move underneath you if you jumped and it were moving at 1000 MILES PER HOUR!!!

Face it. You have lost this debate.

Most heat is trapped by the clouds, which is why it gets colder after a clear day without clouds.

Clouds trap heat now? Clouds? Really? Clouds? Is that your final answer?

Because clouds block the sun and make nice cool shade. Ever fly in an airplane? They reflect the sun’s energy. Notice they are always brighter on top? That’s because they reflect more straight back into the sky than they reflect what little gets through and bounces back up to them. Without clouds, all that energy goes straight down continuously and there is no need to hold heat because we’d get a steady stream of the full dosage.

So by your logic, without hell life couldn't exist. What happened before Lucifer was exiled?

Hell was there before that trouble started. Remember, Jesus says that He created Hell for all the people who He created for the predestined purpose of burning in Hell. Have you even read a Bible?

Thats my point - the air is warmed a lot faster, and cools a lot faster, than the oceans. So of course the water is cooler than the air at the hottest point of the day.

That was not your point. You claimed that water was hotter. The water is cooler period: Day, night, dusk or dawn. Don’t try and save face with atheist double talk.

During the Cold War, both the US and USSR's ICBM strategy involved flying ICBM's over the Northern polar ice cap to hit each other. Also, the nuclear launch submarines hid under the polar ice caps, while being hunted by the smaller (non-launch) subs.

It went over Greenland, you mean. The Ice Wall is farther north than Greenland.

Please do .

I spoke with a creation geologist and he said the sun produces a percentage of heat relative to the position of Hell. Closer toward Hell the Sun accounts for a smaller percentage of the overall heat. Farther away from Hell the Sun accounts for a greater percentage. The sun’s heat output also declines the farther away you are from it. So the calculations are a little more complex than I’d expect a group a grade school kids to calculate.

Thats one way of looking at it, except the ideas which I have learnt about make sense, are repeatable, and are corroborated by photos and videos which show a spherical Earth.

Special effects are pretty good these days. Your photos and videos mean nothing.

The main difference is that I believe what I do because there is real evidence for it. If you can show me a picture which doesn't look obviously photoshopped (and I'm quite good at spotting the signs) then I will start to believe you.

Be honest, sinner. You’d deny any picture you got your hands on and claim it is photoshopped.

Besides, electronic equipment can’t work in regions as cold as the Ice Wall. Friend, I have faith that Jesus, the Creator of the Universe, would not lie to us. I’ll take the word of the Creator who was there at the start over some guy in a lab coat who has only been around for 40-60 years of the Earth’s 6000 year existence.

Really? Jesus (who died around the year 31AD) helped people invent an X-ray machine? Modern tractors or combine harvesters?

Jesus is not dead, heathen. He conquered death.

Look at yourself. Look at everyone you know. Now consider everyone you’ve ever meet. Now put all these people on an untamed island. Do you really see these people coming up with half the stuff we have today? Who taught man to make fire? To cook his food? To use spices to enhance flavor? To talk!!! Who taught man language? You think it just popped out of nowhere? You think some knuckle dragging human being could come up with this stuff. Jesus has been guiding the course of civilization. I know you feel this in your heart.

Like Jesus gave us power until less than 200 years ago? Or was that the work of Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison?

Jesus has his own time table. If He did not want us to have modern conveniences until 200 years ago then that’s how it was going to be. Nikola Tesla is just a tool used by Jesus.

I realise that the Bible teaches that Jesus could cure disease with a touch, but is that the same as saying there would be no disease today? Or is that statement an extrapolation with no basis in scripture?

In the Garden of Eden, there was no disease. I have not been sick in 12 years. Guess how long I’ve been Saved®? In a Godly Paradise there would be no need for disease as there would be no sinners to punish.

You are taking us off topic. The current discussion is about the Reality of a Flat Earth vs. the Theory of a Spherical Earth. I don’t want these posts being any longer than necessary. I answered these because I didn’t want to be rude, but any further off topic discussion will be ignored. Stay on topic!

[Soldier4God]

Re: Real Science

Well Recent Convert basically said everything that needed to be said. But i did notice a contradiction between the "ends of the earth theory". The pictures that i've seen on this site show water running off the edge of the earth into the abyss. but you said yourself that the earth is surrounded by a large wall of ice. So which one is it?

And if the water does run off the edge Where does all the water go? and how does it get back in to the oceans?

I use my eyes as well as my brain to distinguish fact from fiction. So if any of you "True Christians" have real photos of the ends of the earth feel free to share them.

[Soldier4God]

Re: Real Science

It's called surface speed. When you look at revolutions, when you take a 12 inch ball and rotate it at the same rate as a 6 inch ball, lets say 10 rpm (revolutions per minute). Now put a dot on the equator of each ball. as they spin the dots move in unison but not at the same speed. the dot on the larger ball is traveling a farther distance than the one on the 6 inch ball. I could give you some formulas to prove this if you want. that is if you dont think math is a tool used for evil.

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Real Science

Well Recent Convert basically said everything that needed to be said. But i did notice a contradiction between the "ends of the earth theory". The pictures that i've seen on this site show water running off the edge of the earth into the abyss. but you said yourself that the earth is surrounded by a large wall of ice. So which one is it?

They are joke pictures meant to demonstrate the absurdity of using pictures of a spherical earth seeing that you can make a photo of anything. I think they are from a movie poster. Are you really that dense?

[recent_convert]

Re: Real Science

What makes you think that spheres do not create temporal anomalies? You just proved that they do. Just because you are too big to notice the space-time shifts that the baseball creates does not mean they are not present. Why are you ignoring the fact that time would have to be moving faster the further you go up or down from the so-called equator?

Let me break it down for you.

1.) If 500 miles is crossed in 24hrs and 1000 miles is being crossed in 24hrs, they cannot be moving at the same speed.
2.) 500/24 = 20.8333mph
3.) 1000/24 = 41.6666mph
4.) Now recall you just said that the equator of the baseball and the midway point toward the poles are both going full circle simultaneously and AT THE SAME TIME!!!! Therefore, the SAME SPEED!!!
5.) Going at 41.6666 mph the midway latitude would have a 12 hour day!!! Yet that is not the case.

So tell me, how can Pelly Bay, Canada and Cancun, Mexico both have 24 hour days, be in the same time zone and have the sun over them at the same time while taking the world longer to rotate 360 degrees to reach Cancun again verses a smaller distance to rotate 360 degrees from Pelly Bay back to Pelly Bay????? A temporal distortion in the space-time continuum is the only way that could happen.

An argument based on having no understanding of relative velocity across a surface. Try the ruler test I mentioned earlier - do you conclude 2 connected objects can have different velocities, or do you conclude a temporal distortion which would allow same speed over different distances at the same time?

But people do NOT age any faster or slower depending on latitude. Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that the world is not a sphere as spheres naturally create temporal disturbances across their surface.

Please see previous post about passage of time.

Why do you think that linking to a site that agrees with you somehow helps your position? So if I link to a site that says the earth is flat will you then believe me? Because if that’s all it will take to convince you of the truth, that would be a lot quicker than wasting my time going back and forth with you.

If that site could give credible evidence of its position and answered all other inconsistencies of flat Earth theories (lunar eclipse shape, apparent route of sun across surface, shadow length across different areas at same time etc) then its position would be strengthened and gain credibility. When its results have been corroborated by others, using similar and different methods, in double-blind controlled experiments then I would start to believe.

Never said the sun moved clockwise. That’s a straw man argument.

I said the world rotates like a slow record and the sun cuts across at a diagonal angle favoring (for example) South to East. The sun goes over and under the Earth. The FAR REACHES of the North to West sides won’t get any sun until the “record” finally rotates over to East/North, then North/West. At which point South/East will be in perpetual night. Get it now?

My apologies, I misread the original post. But this model would mean that the entire planet would be in darkness at the same time and timezones wouldn't exist.

12 full moons, 12 new moons, when the record rotates full circle; Take your pick. It was later standardized by seasonal changes and the current 12 month system. Different cultures have had different criterion throughout the ages.

The moon takes 28 days to complete one rotation. We use a system of 365 1/4 days per year. 365 1/4 / 28 = 13. So why do we use 12 month system?

The running band is stationed on a flat stationary base. If you stand on a treadmill you will move with the band, but if you jump you will not because it will move underneath you. Just as the Earth would move underneath you if you jumped and it were moving at 1000 MILES PER HOUR!!!

When you're on a moving treadmill, you have to run or walk to keep your position relative to the Earth - its quite literally running away from you! The Earth's motion carries you with it.

Face it. You have lost this debate.

No, I haven't.

Clouds trap heat now? Clouds? Really? Clouds? Is that your final answer?

Because clouds block the sun and make nice cool shade. Ever fly in an airplane? They reflect the sun’s energy. Notice they are always brighter on top? That’s because they reflect more straight back into the sky than they reflect what little gets through and bounces back up to them. Without clouds, all that energy goes straight down continuously and there is no need to hold heat because we’d get a steady stream of the full dosage.

True, clouds are partially reflective. But some energy does pass through them to get absorbed by nearly everything of the planet. This energy is then released again as heat and different wavelength EM. Again, the clouds reflect some of this energy back down towards the Earth and some passes through, back into space.

Hell was there before that trouble started. Remember, Jesus says that He created Hell for all the people who He created for the predestined purpose of burning in Hell. Have you even read a Bible?

I'll take your word for that - I have no problem in admitting that Bible reading is not something I have done for a long time until I found this site. I am trying to get my head around what it teaches and asking questions such as the ones I have been allow me to gain both an objective and emotional understanding from its greatest proponents.

That was not your point. You claimed that water was hotter. The water is cooler period: Day, night, dusk or dawn. Don’t try and save face with atheist double talk.

I was talking about the relative temperature of the seas i.e. the Caribbean is warmer than the North Atlantic. It acts like the insulating jacket around your water boiler and pipes.

It went over Greenland, you mean. The Ice Wall is farther north than Greenland.

According to your own map, what would be the advantage? Greenland is massively out of the way for both a direct route from the USA to the USSR and also a large diversion for a possible route going 'underneath' the Earth.

I spoke with a creation geologist and he said the sun produces a percentage of heat relative to the position of Hell. Closer toward Hell the Sun accounts for a smaller percentage of the overall heat. Farther away from Hell the Sun accounts for a greater percentage. The sun’s heat output also declines the farther away you are from it. So the calculations are a little more complex than I’d expect a group a grade school kids to calculate.

Granted, it does seem to be a complex calculation. I would assume from this that the heat from Hell is manifested through volcanoes and geysers, which would naturally be more concentrated near the middle of the Earth, where Hell is said to be located.

Special effects are pretty good these days. Your photos and videos mean nothing.

Be honest, sinner. You’d deny any picture you got your hands on and claim it is photoshopped.

Besides, electronic equipment can’t work in regions as cold as the Ice Wall. Friend, I have faith that Jesus, the Creator of the Universe, would not lie to us. I’ll take the word of the Creator who was there at the start over some guy in a lab coat who has only been around for 40-60 years of the Earth’s 6000 year existence.

No, actually. I keep an open mind but will always ask questions. Your faith is to be commended and I can tell you do have a sharp, analytical mind. Who you believe is, ultimately, your own choice.

Jesus is not dead, heathen. He conquered death.

Where is he then? Someone is either alive and on this Earth, or dead and part of it.

Look at yourself. Look at everyone you know. Now consider everyone you’ve ever meet. Now put all these people on an untamed island. Do you really see these people coming up with half the stuff we have today? Who taught man to make fire? To cook his food? To use spices to enhance flavor? To talk!!! Who taught man language? You think it just popped out of nowhere? You think some knuckle dragging human being could come up with this stuff. Jesus has been guiding the course of civilization. I know you feel this in your heart.

Okay, I'll play. In this scenario, without external influences and with no communications with the outside world, people would retain the skills they had in their previous lives. Some would not be able to survive, some would. The number would probably depend on the size of the island and the ability to grow vegetables or the availability of edible fish in the near proximity to the island.
Language would be brought with them, as would the knowledge of spices etc. The main problem would be the availability of raw materials. No construction beyond basic woodwork and stonework would be possible and technology beyond a lever wouldn't be available because of lack of infrastructure.
People live and survive for 3 reasons - avoidance of hunger and thirst; to attract a mate; and to look after children. Everything we do and have ever done is to improve these basic needs.
I realise this is off topic but you did ask.

Jesus has his own time table. If He did not want us to have modern conveniences until 200 years ago then that’s how it was going to be. Nikola Tesla is just a tool used by Jesus.

So people have no ability to affect the world in which we live in any way, unless Jesus tells us how to? I'm not being sarcastic, just asking the question.

In the Garden of Eden, there was no disease. I have not been sick in 12 years. Guess how long I’ve been Saved®? In a Godly Paradise there would be no need for disease as there would be no sinners to punish.

You are very lucky. Is the same true for all of the Saved?

You are taking us off topic. The current discussion is about the Reality of a Flat Earth vs. the Theory of a Spherical Earth. I don’t want these posts being any longer than necessary. I answered these because I didn’t want to be rude, but any further off topic discussion will be ignored. Stay on topic!

The 'off-topic' remarks were part of my arguments or as a response to yours.
Thank you for your time.

[Remy Lebeau]

Re: Real Science

An argument based on having no understanding of relative velocity across a surface. Try the ruler test I mentioned earlier –

I’ve done your test. Typical atheists. If someone won’t blindly accept your baseless, idiotic, illogical, irrational conclusions they must not have done the experiment at all.

do you conclude 2 connected objects can have different velocities, or do you conclude a temporal distortion which would allow same speed over different distances at the same time?

I thought I made it clear that the surface of a sphere is inherently temporally distorted.

Look at the facts:

A. That entire line drawn on the ball presents a time zone. So in your experiment, the sun is hitting all regions within that time zone at the same time.
B. The circumferences, and hence the distance a point has to travel to get back to its original position on a sphere, vary along the time zone.
C. A sphere is one solid object.
D. All points along the time zone have a 24 hour day. The sun rises and sets at the same time.

So we have one solid object whose surface is moving in an infinite amount of speeds. And you DON’T think that is a clear case of space-time temporal distortion? You atheists like throw around words like “logical” and "rational”, but you clearly have no grasp of the meaning.

If that site could give credible evidence of its position and answered all other inconsistencies of flat Earth theories (lunar eclipse shape, apparent route of sun across surface, shadow length across different areas at same time etc) then its position would be strengthened and gain credibility. When its results have been corroborated by others, using similar and different methods, in double-blind controlled experiments then I would start to believe.

Don’t give me that. You would deny anything that contradicts your narrow, irrational, uneducated view of the world, which is based on nothing but superstitious archaic nonsense. I understand that people like Eratosthenes back in 240BC wanted answers, did not have True Bibles and made up idiotic theories and stories to account for what they could not understand. Humans beings have a need to know, a natural curiosity that, in the absence of Bibles, could not be satisfied. It is troubling to see that in the year 2011 people are still trying to justify a spherical earth. Mind boggling!

My apologies, I misread the original post. But this model would mean that the entire planet would be in darkness at the same time and timezones wouldn't exist.

No. The Sun has a route that wraps around the world like a bent circle. Because there are no “gravity” cone to slow it down on the underside of the world the Sun shoots straight across the undersurface until it passes the “gravity” of the final circle of Hell and is slingshot back the way it came. Surface “gravity” emitted from the Hell’s center circle stretches upward and outward at a wide angle and takes longer to turn the sun around on the surface because it gets weaker the further you are away from the center. And the firmament won't let it fall.

The moon takes 28 days to complete one rotation. We use a system of 365 1/4 days per year. 365 1/4 / 28 = 13. So why do we use 12 month system?

You tell me. We could use a 4 month system or a 7 month system. At some point people got together and decided to go with 12. Maybe it was the astrologers and their 12 zodiacs. Maybe it was for the 12 tribes of Israel. What does this have to do with the flat earth?

When you're on a moving treadmill, you have to run or walk to keep your position relative to the Earth - its quite literally running away from you! The Earth's motion carries you with it.

You just proved my point!! Oh, so the earth’s motion carries you with it, but treadmills motion doesn’t? Things rather carry you with them or they don’t. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say this cup of water freezes at 32 degree, but this cup of water over here freezes at 50 degrees. Face it, you’ve been debunked.

According to your own map, what would be the advantage? Greenland is massively out of the way for both a direct route from the USA to the USSR and also a large diversion for a possible route going 'underneath' the Earth.

Ask the guys firing missiles over Greenland. You’re the one claiming people fired missiles over icy regions. You tell me what the advantage was? Maybe it is the only way they could do it without firing over a real country and causing themselves more trouble.

Granted, it does seem to be a complex calculation. I would assume from this that the heat from Hell is manifested through volcanoes and geysers, which would naturally be more concentrated near the middle of the Earth, where Hell is said to be located.

Or there is liquid fire running through the Earth’s veins. These veins may link to Hell, but that doesn’t mean they are all directly over Hell.

Where is he then? Someone is either alive and on this Earth, or dead and part of it.

I take it you don’t believe in that alien nonsense. Good. Life is on and directly around Earth only. Anyway, Jesus is alive and well in Heaven. He ascended physically.

Okay, I'll play. In this scenario, without external influences and with no communications with the outside world, people would retain the skills they had in their previous lives.

No. I mean they go there with no knowledge. Just their skin and bones. They know nothing about fire, cooking food, what is edible or what is poisonous. They are without any language, writing, clothing, shame, etc. They have no tools, no concept of construction, no knowledge of what animals are dangerous, nada, zilch, zippo. We are starting from scratch here.

You are very lucky. Is the same true for all of the Saved?

Ask another True Christian™. I won’t speak for anyone other than myself, but I suspect as much.