Your home for discussing politics, the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and the principles of liberty.
https://ldsfreedomforum.com/
Worth noting, in light of my question in the immediately preceding post - which I hope both Allison and Shawn will answer!
I know you want to pin us down to one model so you can dig into something. But how could we know for sure? I would love to explore different possibilities and rule out any that don’t hold water, but in this environment, it becomes either/or. Either this or that model is unassailable, or the Blue Marble is true.BroJones wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 6:56 amWorth noting, in light of my question in the immediately preceding post - which I hope both Allison and Shawn will answer!
Here's that question again, for your convenience:
"Anyway, do you agree with the argument in the video that Antarctica "circles" the flat earth and so cannot be circumnavigated? Would appreciate your comment on this - Greg Resee lays down a challenge here!"
So I take it you decline to answer my question... Interesting !!Allison wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 7:09 amI know you want to pin us down to one model so you can dig into something. But how could we know for sure? I would love to explore different possibilities and rule out any that don’t hold water, but in this environment, it becomes either/or. Either this or that model is unassailable, or the Blue Marble is true.BroJones wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 6:56 amWorth noting, in light of my question in the immediately preceding post - which I hope both Allison and Shawn will answer!
Here's that question again, for your convenience:
"Anyway, do you agree with the argument in the video that Antarctica "circles" the flat earth and so cannot be circumnavigated? Would appreciate your comment on this - Greg Resee lays down a challenge here!"
I post these videos as a collection of possible scenarios to consider that there may very well be other possibilities beyond the constantly revised geocentric ball dogma. But you want to frame the debate that way, to avoid having to demonstrate an actual curve.
I started it, but that video is nearly FIVE HOURS long!CaptainM wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 8:02 am Highly recommended…
https://youtu.be/JKdRtRr3O-I
In Christ. Best wishes
BroJones wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 7:13 amSo I take it you decline to answer my question... Interesting !!Allison wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 7:09 amI know you want to pin us down to one model so you can dig into something. But how could we know for sure? I would love to explore different possibilities and rule out any that don’t hold water, but in this environment, it becomes either/or. Either this or that model is unassailable, or the Blue Marble is true.BroJones wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 6:56 amWorth noting, in light of my question in the immediately preceding post - which I hope both Allison and Shawn will answer!
Here's that question again, for your convenience:
"Anyway, do you agree with the argument in the video that Antarctica "circles" the flat earth and so cannot be circumnavigated? Would appreciate your comment on this - Greg Resee lays down a challenge here!"
I post these videos as a collection of possible scenarios to consider that there may very well be other possibilities beyond the constantly revised geocentric ball dogma. But you want to frame the debate that way, to avoid having to demonstrate an actual curve.
" But you want to frame the debate that way, to avoid having to demonstrate an actual curve." -- That is NOT what I want at all!! Please don't sour the discussion by "reading my mind"!
Yes, as I said earlier. Antarctica is brutal. That's why it's defied attempts to colonise it properly outwith a few places nearby such as Tierra del Fuego, the Falklands, South Georgia (for a while) and the bottom of New Zealand.Subcomandante wrote: ↑December 10th, 2022, 10:45 pmThe military would not waste an entire garrison trying to stop people from penetrating the continent interior. The catabatic winds and minus 100 degree windchills do MORE than enough for that to happen.Allison wrote: ↑December 10th, 2022, 6:04 pmThe military. I should look for some video reports about this. But first, will post one about the Southern Cross.BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑December 10th, 2022, 5:55 pmWho stops them?Allison wrote: ↑December 10th, 2022, 5:44 pm
You are right, whoever said people are not allowed there obviously overgeneralized. Private citizens are not allowed to explore, and there are several incidents where people have tried to and were stopped. Okay, there is a military village on the peninsula and no doubt other military bases. Can you provide any information leading to explorers actually exploring the place?
There have been many expeditions to the South Pole. There is even a station at the South Pole manned by Americans.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQ3_gZ3ZS_4
I agree. It is a long listen. What was done was a read of the $30 book on Amazon. The Bible is a major source of information within the book, but also the book reveals how and where the globe concept came from. The Kindle version is available on Amazon for a reasonable cost which is what I have.BroJones wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 8:10 amI started it, but that video is nearly FIVE HOURS long!CaptainM wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 8:02 am Highly recommended…
https://youtu.be/JKdRtRr3O-I
In Christ. Best wishes
Can you summarize, pls? Looks like his "proof" is based on the Bible - is that right?
NeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 10:32 am I'm still waiting to see a coherent integrated model of flat earth so we can understand how it all fits together.
What are the dimensions of flat earth?
What are the dimensions of the Moon and Sun?
What do these two bodies consist of?
What forces maintain their position?
How far away are the stars, what are their dimensions and what do they consist of?
What if anything lies beyond them?
If we could get some specifics going it might help the dumbest of us (well, me) get a fix on things.
Sorry, but that's nonsense. Before you can advance a theory and expect to have it taken seriously you need to produce a coherent model that conforms to all observations.Allison wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 11:33 amNeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 10:32 am I'm still waiting to see a coherent integrated model of flat earth so we can understand how it all fits together.
What are the dimensions of flat earth?
What are the dimensions of the Moon and Sun?
What do these two bodies consist of?
What forces maintain their position?
How far away are the stars, what are their dimensions and what do they consist of?
What if anything lies beyond them?
If we could get some specifics going it might help the dumbest of us (well, me) get a fix on things.
I’m sorry, but we keep telling you that we are not there yet. That fact does not prove curvature, though. I’ve heard some plausible-sounding hypotheses, but have no idea which, if any, are the answer.
It does sound fun though, to start with a reasonable model and try to poke holes in it, to see if it should be modified or discarded…and keep going through that process to see what emerges from lots of testing and trials.
This is ancient Hebrew cosmology, not a theory.NeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 12:34 pmSorry, but that's nonsense. Before you can advance a theory and expect to have it taken seriously you need to produce a coherent model that conforms to all observations.Allison wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 11:33 amNeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 10:32 am I'm still waiting to see a coherent integrated model of flat earth so we can understand how it all fits together.
What are the dimensions of flat earth?
What are the dimensions of the Moon and Sun?
What do these two bodies consist of?
What forces maintain their position?
How far away are the stars, what are their dimensions and what do they consist of?
What if anything lies beyond them?
If we could get some specifics going it might help the dumbest of us (well, me) get a fix on things.
I’m sorry, but we keep telling you that we are not there yet. That fact does not prove curvature, though. I’ve heard some plausible-sounding hypotheses, but have no idea which, if any, are the answer.
It does sound fun though, to start with a reasonable model and try to poke holes in it, to see if it should be modified or discarded…and keep going through that process to see what emerges from lots of testing and trials.
If that point hasn't been reached then there is no flat earth theory, just a series of incoherent claims with no observational framework to support them.
Why would anyone favor this over the coherent, observationally supported globe model?
And?Pazooka wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 12:52 pmThis is ancient Hebrew cosmology, not a theory.NeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 12:34 pmSorry, but that's nonsense. Before you can advance a theory and expect to have it taken seriously you need to produce a coherent model that conforms to all observations.Allison wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 11:33 amNeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 10:32 am I'm still waiting to see a coherent integrated model of flat earth so we can understand how it all fits together.
What are the dimensions of flat earth?
What are the dimensions of the Moon and Sun?
What do these two bodies consist of?
What forces maintain their position?
How far away are the stars, what are their dimensions and what do they consist of?
What if anything lies beyond them?
If we could get some specifics going it might help the dumbest of us (well, me) get a fix on things.
I’m sorry, but we keep telling you that we are not there yet. That fact does not prove curvature, though. I’ve heard some plausible-sounding hypotheses, but have no idea which, if any, are the answer.
It does sound fun though, to start with a reasonable model and try to poke holes in it, to see if it should be modified or discarded…and keep going through that process to see what emerges from lots of testing and trials.
If that point hasn't been reached then there is no flat earth theory, just a series of incoherent claims with no observational framework to support them.
Why would anyone favor this over the coherent, observationally supported globe model?
Well said NeveR!NeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 12:34 pmSorry, but that's nonsense. Before you can advance a theory and expect to have it taken seriously you need to produce a coherent model that conforms to all observations.Allison wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 11:33 amNeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 10:32 am I'm still waiting to see a coherent integrated model of flat earth so we can understand how it all fits together.
What are the dimensions of flat earth?
What are the dimensions of the Moon and Sun?
What do these two bodies consist of?
What forces maintain their position?
How far away are the stars, what are their dimensions and what do they consist of?
What if anything lies beyond them?
If we could get some specifics going it might help the dumbest of us (well, me) get a fix on things.
I’m sorry, but we keep telling you that we are not there yet. That fact does not prove curvature, though. I’ve heard some plausible-sounding hypotheses, but have no idea which, if any, are the answer.
It does sound fun though, to start with a reasonable model and try to poke holes in it, to see if it should be modified or discarded…and keep going through that process to see what emerges from lots of testing and trials.
If that point hasn't been reached then there is no flat earth theory, just a series of incoherent claims with no observational framework to support them.
Why would anyone favor this over the coherent, observationally supported globe model?
Which your side has not done. The heliocentric model is chalked so full of holes it is laughable.NeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 12:34 pm Sorry, but that's nonsense. Before you can advance a theory and expect to have it taken seriously you need to produce a coherent model that conforms to all observations.
If that point hasn't been reached then there is no flat earth theory, just a series of incoherent claims with no observational framework to support them.
Why would anyone favor this over the coherent, observationally supported globe model?
Enoch was taken up among the angels, and there he learned the hidden things, the matters within the veil that were known only to the high priests (Num.18.7). Since this was the place of the throne, he was learning the secret things of the Kingdom: how the Kingdom, Day One, was divided, and how the actions of men were weighed in a balance (1 Enoch 41.1). He saw all parts of the creation moving in their appointed ways, ‘keeping faith with each other in accordance with the oath, i.e. covenant, that they observe’ (1 Enoch 41.5). ~ Margaret Barker, The Lord is OneNeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 1:00 pmAnd?Pazooka wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 12:52 pmThis is ancient Hebrew cosmology, not a theory.NeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 12:34 pmSorry, but that's nonsense. Before you can advance a theory and expect to have it taken seriously you need to produce a coherent model that conforms to all observations.Allison wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 11:33 am
I’m sorry, but we keep telling you that we are not there yet. That fact does not prove curvature, though. I’ve heard some plausible-sounding hypotheses, but have no idea which, if any, are the answer.
It does sound fun though, to start with a reasonable model and try to poke holes in it, to see if it should be modified or discarded…and keep going through that process to see what emerges from lots of testing and trials.
If that point hasn't been reached then there is no flat earth theory, just a series of incoherent claims with no observational framework to support them.
Why would anyone favor this over the coherent, observationally supported globe model?
Makes no difference what the original source is, if there's no attempt at a coherent model to explain how the system works together to produce all the effects we observe - there's nothing there to evaluate or to be taken seriously.
You don't even have a ballpark figure for how big the sun is! Or how far away it is! Let alone any model for the wider universe (other than it has a lot of water in it apparently!).
Seriously - how can anyone debate a concept as threadbare as this?
NeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 12:34 pmSorry, but that's nonsense. Before you can advance a theory and expect to have it taken seriously you need to produce a coherent model that conforms to all observations.Allison wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 11:33 amNeveR wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 10:32 am I'm still waiting to see a coherent integrated model of flat earth so we can understand how it all fits together.
What are the dimensions of flat earth?
What are the dimensions of the Moon and Sun?
What do these two bodies consist of?
What forces maintain their position?
How far away are the stars, what are their dimensions and what do they consist of?
What if anything lies beyond them?
If we could get some specifics going it might help the dumbest of us (well, me) get a fix on things.
I’m sorry, but we keep telling you that we are not there yet. That fact does not prove curvature, though. I’ve heard some plausible-sounding hypotheses, but have no idea which, if any, are the answer.
It does sound fun though, to start with a reasonable model and try to poke holes in it, to see if it should be modified or discarded…and keep going through that process to see what emerges from lots of testing and trials.
If that point hasn't been reached then there is no flat earth theory, just a series of incoherent claims with no observational framework to support them.
Why would anyone favor this over the coherent, observationally supported globe model?
My admiration for you grows every day! I believe you.
Truth is worth any price. And it's a straightforward question, really. Any person who considers himself a scientist, and anybody else who claims to want to know truth should be able to easily answer yes to something like that.
