I see no convincing arguments here, although I agree that many of the arguments put forward indeed are quite childish.
I personally keep an open mind, as I do not profess to know, as my experience is limited in many respects.
So, when I find an argument or two that leaves me shy an answer, and no one else has taken up the cause of answering it, I remain open to the idea that I cannot answer that particular question.
It does not mean the total system of FE is correct. But what does conform to our observations, see the Tycho Brahe system, does not by default means that it is a correct definition of our reality.
Don't ask me dude. I am not FE. I am merely saying: the globe system works because, as a mariner, the heading for buenaventura is quite different on a globe than on a flat plane. Note, I am writing this as a mariner. Meaning: a practical dude, going from A-B, using standard navigation equipment: compass + tables and sextant. (I know old school, but at least I know, right)
See my comment where I go into the nitty gritty.
The question, positive question, is how is it possible to send a laser light to a location that is supposed to be below the curvature, and receive it on the same height where it originated, I cannot answer. I would love to know the answer though.
One might say, that is because the earth's surface is on a flat plane, instead of a globe like surface.
When we tie in your question, in a globe situation it is quite apparent. And to FE people, well, their system does not really supply an answer without supposing another layer of complexity, which needs explaining, testing and proving.
In the mean time, while looking for the answer to the laser question, we might try to send a laser beam across longer distances both north-south and east-west. We maybe find an answer in certain electromagnetic properties, or maybe, the world is bigger than we think it is, or something else!
By the same token: when shooting (again, I am a practical guy) at long distance, when taking out a target, why does one have to take the coriolis effect into account, IF we were to be in an FE situation instead of a spinning globe situation. See, it works in a globe system, not on a flat plane situation.
And this is what I would want for us to do:
To make clear by experiment the true nature of reality. Science is all about practical experimentation and replication. And we forget that sometimes with all the very big questions on galaxies and universes and string theories, God, who was first.
We should stop the infighting, and listen to practical things.
It is like the bible book: Proverbs advocating for practical wisdom. wisdom and knowledge you can employ for day to day experience. That is the NOW. And that is what unites us.
I see no convincing arguments here, although I agree that many of the arguments put forward indeed are quite childish.
I personally keep an open mind, as I do not profess to know, as my experience is limited in many respects.
So, when I find an argument or two that leaves me shy an answer, and no one else has taken up the cause of answering it, I remain open to the idea that I cannot answer that particular question.
It does not mean the total system of FE is correct. But what does conform to our observations, see the Tycho Brahe system, does not by default means that it is a correct definition of our reality.
Maybe that is just to subtle for you.
When it’s daytime in the United States why can’t you see the sun when you’re in China if the world is flat?
Don't ask me dude. I am not FE. I am merely saying: the globe system works because, as a mariner, the heading for buenaventura is quite different on a globe than on a flat plane. Note, I am writing this as a mariner. Meaning: a practical dude, going from A-B, using standard navigation equipment: compass + tables and sextant. (I know old school, but at least I know, right)
See my comment where I go into the nitty gritty.
The question, positive question, is how is it possible to send a laser light to a location that is supposed to be below the curvature, and receive it on the same height where it originated, I cannot answer. I would love to know the answer though.
One might say, that is because the earth's surface is on a flat plane, instead of a globe like surface.
When we tie in your question, in a globe situation it is quite apparent. And to FE people, well, their system does not really supply an answer without supposing another layer of complexity, which needs explaining, testing and proving.
In the mean time, while looking for the answer to the laser question, we might try to send a laser beam across longer distances both north-south and east-west. We maybe find an answer in certain electromagnetic properties, or maybe, the world is bigger than we think it is, or something else!
By the same token: when shooting (again, I am a practical guy) at long distance, when taking out a target, why does one have to take the coriolis effect into account, IF we were to be in an FE situation instead of a spinning globe situation. See, it works in a globe system, not on a flat plane situation.
And this is what I would want for us to do: To make clear by experiment the true nature of reality. Science is all about practical experimentation and replication. And we forget that sometimes with all the very big questions on galaxies and universes and string theories, God, who was first.
We should stop the infighting, and listen to practical things.
It is like the bible book: Proverbs advocating for practical wisdom. wisdom and knowledge you can employ for day to day experience. That is the NOW. And that is what unites us.