Earth is a created realm - not necessarily flat (plenty of altitude changes), but definitely not a meaningless ball spiraling millions of miles an hour in a billions of years old void of creation and destruction.
The spinning ball has two primary characteristics:
You're spinning
There's ultimately a curving downward and away from any position you're at, given enough distance
Both of these are obviously untrue and any meaningful declaration otherwise is based out of misunderstanding of either the theory around the ball or the opposing viewpoint.
That said, I don't spend much time worrying about this stuff anymore, but it is life changing, for sure.
See Foucault's pendulum. It takes a little bit of mathematical sophistication to run these calculations, but I have done this experiment myself (as an undergrad). It shows quite clearly the earth is spinning. It allows you to show your latitude easily, and if you go to a different latitude you get the predicted results.
There's ultimately a curving downward and away from any position you're at, given enough distance
Have you never watched a boat go over the horizon?
Living by two different oceans for the majority of my life, I have many times.
Foucalt's pendulum is a joke, friend! It may work by calculation, sure, but were the Earth's spin the cause of any movement you would be able to recreate the experiment with no motor or push to start on literally any fixture of propper height. In reality, that doesn't work. The suspended string would just hang there, unmoving, forever.
The second phenomenon is a result of the angular resolution of your eyes. In a flat building of great enough width you will see the ceiling decline and the ground rise to your eye line over a distance. It's not disappearing over a curve - eyes just don't see forever.
It may work by calculation, sure, but were the Earth's spin the cause of any movement you would be able to recreate the experiment with no motor or push to start on literally any fixture of propper height. that doesn't work. The suspended string would just hang there, unmoving, forever.
Foucault's pendulum shows a latitude specific precession of the pendulum. This means depending on what latitude you are at (which part of the rotating sphere you are on) dictates HOW FAST the pendulum precesses around in a circle. If you change latitudes it precesses at a different rate. If you are on the equator, it precesses not one bit. If you are at the north (or south) pole its precession is maximized and it takes exactly one day to go around. And if you are at the north pole it precesses in the opposite direction as the south pole, exactly as you would expect if you were on a spinning sphere..
This is a simple experiment (although not simple to personally travel to all those places). If you (or any flat earther) had ever studied physics or even just math, there would be no more flat earthers.
Firstly, "flat earth," doesn't propose a disk. Secondly, night and day on a flat earth are easily explained in several ways - much more easily than night and day on a ball that continuously arcs and speeds in a variety of directions simultaneously without any ascertainable sensation of motion.
These are all among the first things you'll learn in even a badic 40 minute presentation by even a clown like Eric Dubay - if you haven't gotten past these things, you haven't even looked into the idea yet, m8.
That's right, I haven't. Because nobody has given me a reason to.
Not a disk? OK, what shape?
How are night/day easily explained by flat but not round? Round means that the Sun blocks the light on the opposite side from where the Sun is, and that explains night. Day should be obvious light from the Sun. How does flat explain it better?
A disk assumes space, which neither you or anyone you know has ever been close to, is a real thing.
Remove the outer space programming and look at the world. You're on a textured surface of land where up is up and down is down. The luminaries in the sky are not a product of theoretical nuclear fusion. Actually go outside and look at the stars one night.
Next, take the various movements the Earth is allegedly performing day after day and rectify that with the fact that ancient structures, pyramids and whatnot, where built with constellations in mind - also the stars were already mapped thousands of years ago.
Thousands of years of continuous alignment with the celestial bodies despite going tens of thousands of miles an hour around the sun, while the sun and us go hundreds of thousands of miles an hour around the galactic core and on and on?
Then sit back and realize that basically all of what you know about all this was given to you by completely untestable, unrepeatable means from figures of authority that you are never to question. You should see the same pattern emerging as you've seen across many other areas of waking up.
One model proposes a smaller local sun, the other proposes a 93 million mile distant sun that just happens to be the same size from Earth as the 240,000 thousand mile distant moon.
I’m not saying I believe this model, but one that was thought provoking was that the day/night can still be explained by the sun being much closer and traveling in a circle.
One attempt to model compared the light/shadow to the yin/yang symbol.
Whether the model is correct or not I wouldn’t be surprised if that concept was part of what the yin/yang symbol was supposed to represent.
Earth is a created realm - not necessarily flat (plenty of altitude changes), but definitely not a meaningless ball spiraling millions of miles an hour in a billions of years old void of creation and destruction.
The spinning ball has two primary characteristics:
Both of these are obviously untrue and any meaningful declaration otherwise is based out of misunderstanding of either the theory around the ball or the opposing viewpoint.
That said, I don't spend much time worrying about this stuff anymore, but it is life changing, for sure.
See Foucault's pendulum. It takes a little bit of mathematical sophistication to run these calculations, but I have done this experiment myself (as an undergrad). It shows quite clearly the earth is spinning. It allows you to show your latitude easily, and if you go to a different latitude you get the predicted results.
Have you never watched a boat go over the horizon?
Living by two different oceans for the majority of my life, I have many times.
Foucalt's pendulum is a joke, friend! It may work by calculation, sure, but were the Earth's spin the cause of any movement you would be able to recreate the experiment with no motor or push to start on literally any fixture of propper height. In reality, that doesn't work. The suspended string would just hang there, unmoving, forever.
The second phenomenon is a result of the angular resolution of your eyes. In a flat building of great enough width you will see the ceiling decline and the ground rise to your eye line over a distance. It's not disappearing over a curve - eyes just don't see forever.
Foucault's pendulum shows a latitude specific precession of the pendulum. This means depending on what latitude you are at (which part of the rotating sphere you are on) dictates HOW FAST the pendulum precesses around in a circle. If you change latitudes it precesses at a different rate. If you are on the equator, it precesses not one bit. If you are at the north (or south) pole its precession is maximized and it takes exactly one day to go around. And if you are at the north pole it precesses in the opposite direction as the south pole, exactly as you would expect if you were on a spinning sphere..
This is a simple experiment (although not simple to personally travel to all those places). If you (or any flat earther) had ever studied physics or even just math, there would be no more flat earthers.
If you never studied physics or math, there would be no more globers...
Ill see myself out
What is the farthest distance you have seen a boat with a telescope?
Why would a ball be meaningless? Would a disk somehow be meaningful?
Right, given enough distance.
Not obvious to me. A round Earth explains why day and night exist. How would a flat Earth explain day/night?
Firstly, "flat earth," doesn't propose a disk. Secondly, night and day on a flat earth are easily explained in several ways - much more easily than night and day on a ball that continuously arcs and speeds in a variety of directions simultaneously without any ascertainable sensation of motion.
These are all among the first things you'll learn in even a badic 40 minute presentation by even a clown like Eric Dubay - if you haven't gotten past these things, you haven't even looked into the idea yet, m8.
That's right, I haven't. Because nobody has given me a reason to.
Not a disk? OK, what shape?
How are night/day easily explained by flat but not round? Round means that the Sun blocks the light on the opposite side from where the Sun is, and that explains night. Day should be obvious light from the Sun. How does flat explain it better?
A disk assumes space, which neither you or anyone you know has ever been close to, is a real thing.
Remove the outer space programming and look at the world. You're on a textured surface of land where up is up and down is down. The luminaries in the sky are not a product of theoretical nuclear fusion. Actually go outside and look at the stars one night.
Next, take the various movements the Earth is allegedly performing day after day and rectify that with the fact that ancient structures, pyramids and whatnot, where built with constellations in mind - also the stars were already mapped thousands of years ago.
Thousands of years of continuous alignment with the celestial bodies despite going tens of thousands of miles an hour around the sun, while the sun and us go hundreds of thousands of miles an hour around the galactic core and on and on?
Then sit back and realize that basically all of what you know about all this was given to you by completely untestable, unrepeatable means from figures of authority that you are never to question. You should see the same pattern emerging as you've seen across many other areas of waking up.
One model proposes a smaller local sun, the other proposes a 93 million mile distant sun that just happens to be the same size from Earth as the 240,000 thousand mile distant moon.
I’m not saying I believe this model, but one that was thought provoking was that the day/night can still be explained by the sun being much closer and traveling in a circle.
One attempt to model compared the light/shadow to the yin/yang symbol.
Whether the model is correct or not I wouldn’t be surprised if that concept was part of what the yin/yang symbol was supposed to represent.