Preamble
This is a work in progress. It will be added too as more nonsense is spewed forth by the Flat Earthers. My goal is to aggregate reliable sources of data. No hearsay, no grift, no illusion. Just the facts.
What Did Q Say?
Source: https://qalerts.app/?q=Flat+earth
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/srEFW
H/T @ReXRP on Truth Social
Nautical Miles: Proof the Earth is not Flat
Why Is A Nautical Mile Different From A Regular Mile?
Nautical miles are longer than land miles because they use degrees to determine measurements of distance on the water, which is a reliable and long-standing principle of maritime navigation. Nautical miles rely on mathematics pertaining to the Earth's circumference and to longitude and latitude - this is particularly useful on longer voyages and when marine charts are in use.
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/GumoV
A Knot
The term knot dates back from the 17th Century when ancient mariners gauged the speed of their ship using a device called “common log” or chip log. In this method, knots were tied at uniform intervals in a rope which had a piece of slice shaped wood at the end. The wood was then tossed behind the ship. As the vessel moved, the rope rolled out freely for a specific time and then the number of knots were counted and used in calculating the speed of the vessel. The speed was said to be the counted number of knots.
After standardization of nautical miles in 1929, knot was agreed to be its standard unit of measuring speed, calculated based on time and distance.
Up to date, knots are used in navigation and aviation, normally shown on aircraft’s airspeed indicators and is expressed in terms of nautical miles per hour. For example, if you are moving at a speed of 1 nautical mile per hour, we say you are moving at a speed of I knot.
Source: https://www.getthatright.com/what-is-a-nautical-mile-regular-mile-vs-nautical-mile/
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/veaov
A Little History
The idea that the Earth is a sphere was all but settled by ancient Greek philosophers such as Aristotle (384–322 BC), who obtained empirical evidence after travelling to Egypt and seeing new constellations of stars. Eratosthenes, in the third century BC, became the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth. Islamic scholars made further advanced measurements from about the 9th century AD onwards, while European navigators circled the Earth in the 16th century. Images from space were final proof, if any were needed.
Today’s flat-Earth believers are not, though, the first to doubt what seems unquestionable. The notion of a flat Earth initially resurfaced in the 1800s as a backlash to scientific progress, especially among those who wished to return to biblical literalism. Perhaps the most famous proponent was the British writer Samuel Rowbotham (1816–1884). He proposed the Earth is a flat immovable disc, centred at the North Pole, with Antarctica replaced by an ice wall at the disc’s outer boundary.
But even without the visual confirmation of pictures taken from space, many of the arguments used by flat-Earth proponents can be easily dismissed with trigonometry or basic physical laws. A good place to start is with a Foucault’s pendulum, the device named after the French physicist Léon Foucault, who in 1851 famously hung a heavy 28 kg brass bob from a 67 m chain in the Panthéon in Paris. Such a pendulum, which can swing in any plane, changes direction during the course of a day, yielding direct evidence of the Earth’s rotation. (Though as Slegr points out, that hasn’t stopped some flat-Earthers claiming that all Foucault pendulums are fraudulent and that museums use magnetic coils to turn the plane of the pendulum’s rotation to make the Earth seem to rotate.)
Source: https://physicsworld.com/a/fighting-flat-earth-theory/
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/S1NIN
To observe Earth’s curved horizon, one must be at least 10,668 metres (about 35,000 feet) above its surface. Since the technology of ancient cultureswas insufficient to allow people to reach such heights, the world around them appeared to be flat and stationary. Their perceptions were further reinforced by the movements of the Sun and the Moon, which appear to rise in the east and set in the west relative to a flat horizon, and of the stars, which appear to rotate in a dome overhead.
Different descriptions of a flat Earth can be found in the annals of ancient civilizations worldwide. For example, ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian records describe the world as a disk in the ocean with the heavens arching above it. An Iraqi tablet dated to 1000 BCE shows Babylon at the centre of a flat disk, and the Greek philosopher Anaximander (610–546 BCE) perceived Earth as a flat disk perched at the top of a cylinder. In Norse cosmology, Earth’s flat plane is encircled by an ocean, with a world tree or pillar at the centre. In India some sacred texts describe the planet as a series of stacked flat disks, while others describe it as a horizontal wheel set on a vertical axle. In China Earth was described as flat and square into the 17th century, at which time Western scienceintroduced evidence for the planet’s spherical shape (see also spherical Earth).
Contemporary revival
The idea that Earth is flat seems to have an enduring hold on human imagination. In the 1830s a commune in Britain, led by British writer Samuel Birley Rowbotham, resurrected the concept as backlash against rapid scientific progress. Members believed that Earth was a circular disk with the North Pole at the centre and a wall of ice surrounding the edges of the disk to contain the oceans. The group was regarded as a harmless symbol of British eccentricity.
What would become the modern flat Earth concept emerged modestly in the 1950s as the Flat Earth Society, a small fringe group in Britain with a membership of fewer than 4,000 people. However, largely due to the rising influence of the Internet and social media in the early 2000s, the organization launched itself worldwide in October 2009, and annual conferences followed and catered to a variety of worldviews. Some of the society’s models echo the ancient view of Earth as a disk with a dome of stars rotating above it. The models of other groups, however, claim that the Sun and the Moon are only 50 km (31 miles) in diameter and that they circle the disk at a height of 5,500 km (3,417 miles). Others envision a world hemmed in by Antarctica (which is believed to extend infinitely in all directions), or they reject conventional laws of gravity, explaining that Earth exists as a disk that accelerates upward in order to give the illusion of gravity.
Source: https://www.britannica.com/topic/flat-Earth
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/UgD6E
Does the Bible Say the Earth is Flat?
The Septuagint was a third-century BC translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew to Greek. The need for this translation was that many Jews of the time no longer could speak or read Hebrew. This was particularly true of Jews of the Diaspora, of which many were living in Alexandria, Egypt, where the Septuagint translation was done. Alexandria was a major Greek city and was a center of Greek learning and culture. Consequently, the people of Alexandria, including its Jews, were heavily Hellenized: and so the Jews of Alexandria were familiar with the then-current science.
The Greek cosmology of the time held to a spherical earth concentric within a much larger solid, transparent sphere on which the stars were affixed (the celestial sphere). The sun, moon, and five naked-eye planets moved on smaller spheres within the celestial sphere. The Greek word stereoma, referring to something hard, was used to describe the celestial sphere. Since Hellenized Jews of the time were aware of this cosmology, it is no accident that the Septuagint translated the rāqîa‘ as stereoma, apparently in an attempt to accommodate the cosmology of their day. The earliest known Jewish writings that address cosmology are from the medieval period, and they reflect medieval cosmology described above. Therefore, we have no knowledge of what specific cosmology the ancient Hebrews believed. However, the Greek word that the Septuagint translators chose is a strong clue as to what at least Hellenized Jews of the ancient world thought. It likely was a spherical earth centered in the celestial sphere. This is very different from a vaulted dome over a flat earth that flat-earthers promote.
Several centuries after the translation of the Septuagint, Jerome translated both the Old Testament and the New Testament into Latin. Jerome selected the Latin word firmamentum to translate rāqîa‘, a word analogous to the Greek word stereoma. The hard, transparent celestial sphere model of the ancient Greeks was still the dominant cosmology in Jerome’s day. Therefore, he both accommodated that cosmology and endorsed the Septuagint’s reading on the matter. Much later, translators of early English versions of the Bible merely transliterated Jerome’s choice into English as firmament. This has caused problems ever since, because people recognize the word firm within that word and assume that the rāqîa‘ must be something hard. However, as we have already seen, rather than referring to something necessarily hard, the word rāqîa‘ probably refers to something that has been spread out. This is why many modern English translations render the rāqîa‘ as “expanse.” This is a good translation, because it gets to the heart of what the likely intended meaning of rāqîa‘ is. Some modern translations render rāqîa‘ as “sky.” This, too, is a good translation, because the sky that we see above us encompasses the likely meaning of the rāqîa‘, as discussed previously.
It is a common belief today that the cosmology presented in the Bible is that of a hard dome over the earth supported by pillars. Clearly, this is at odds with the facts. First, the Bible does not explicitly teach any cosmology. Rather, one may piece together certain passages to sort out what possible cosmology may be there, but one must be careful not to read into these passages interpretations coming from external sources.
Here I have examined the biblical passages flat-earthers generally use to claim the Bible teaches the earth is flat. There are other passages flat-earthers occasionally use. However, the frequency of use of those passages is far less than the verses I discussed here. Furthermore, those remaining verses generally require the assumption the earth is flat to begin with. Once these more important, frequently cited passages are dismissed as teaching a flat earth, the remaining few verses probably do not matter. Depending upon reaction to this article, I may take up those other passages later. Clearly, the Bible does not teach that the earth is flat. It was Bible skeptics who introduced this false claim in the 19th century. It is a shame that professed Bible-believers recently have embraced this false argument and have gone on to promote the flat earth. When combined with its many scientific and observational problems, the flat-earth theory is disproven.
Source: https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/earth/does-bible-teach-earth-flat/
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/lhozR
The term raqia, here translated as “expanse,” implies something that has been spread out or stretched out; it is a cognate of the verb raqa, which means, “to spread out or stretch out.” No specific material substance is inherent in the term raqia, so just what has been spread out must be determined from the context. The context of raqia in the Genesis narrative does not imply any sort of solid structure. Genesis 1:8 states that God called the raqia shemayim, thus equating the raqia with the “sky” or “the heavens.” The term raqia of the shemayim, or “expanse of the sky” or “expanse of the heavens,” occurs four times in the creation narrative: Gen. 1:14-15,17, 20. Birds are said to fly “in the open expanse of the sky” (Gen. 1:20).
The raqia is just the sky, and, obviously, the sky is not a solid structure. How, then, did anyone ever get the idea that the raqia was a solid structure, such as a vault, a dome, or an inverted metal bowl? Therein, by several strands, hangs a tale.
Many English-speakers have been influenced by the King James Version's translation of raqia, “firmament,” which certainly conveys the idea of something firm and solid. Remarkably, the origins of the word “firmament” go all the way back to the Third Century before Christ. The Septuagint was a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, produced around 250 BC by 70 Jewish scholars in Alexandria, Egypt, at the behest of Ptolemy Philadelphus, the Hellenistic ruler of Egypt, for inclusion in the famous library of Alexandria. Apparently, these translators were influenced by then-popular cosmological notions that included the idea that the sky was a stone vault. They translated raqia into Greek as stereoma, which connotes a “solid structure.” Over six hundred years later, when Jerome was translating the Hebrew Scriptures into the Latin Bible that would become known as the Vulgate, he was influenced by the Septuagint, and translated raqia into the Latin word firmamentum, meaning a strong or steadfast support. Finally, some 1200 years later, when English scholars were translating the Scriptures into what would become the most influential English Bible—the King James Version---Jerome's Latin term firmamentum was simply transliterated into English as “firmament.”
But the history of the KJV's translation does not explain why any contemporary commentator, familiar with modern scholarship, would argue that the Hebrew term raqia signifies a solid vault. In sources such as the famous Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, it is stressed that:
While this English word is derived from the Latin firmamentum which signifies firmness or strengthening,...the Hebrew word, raqia, has no such meaning, but denoted the “expanse,” that which was stretched out. Certainly the sky was not regarded as a hard vault in which the heavenly orbs were fixed.... There is therefore nothing in the language of the original to suggest that the writers were influenced by the imaginative ideas of heathen nations (1981, p. 67).
Source: https://advindicate.com/articles/1494
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/5d8sz
Why the Dome Model is Utter Nonsense
I know that Flat Earthers misrepresent and misuse this model as "prove" of Flat Earth by lying about it and keeping secret the following:
This Flat Earth Dome Model can make correct predictions for many observations, because:
This Flat Earth Dome Model is entirely based on the Heliocentric Model and Newton's Laws of Gravitation and Motion for all calculations. It uses in the real world measured 3D Orbits, Constellations, Inclinations, Axial Tilts, Distances and Velocities, and the correct Sizes and Masses of Sun, Moon and Globe Earth to calculate all Observables, see Source Code: FE-Dome App.
The results from the calculations using the Heliocentric Model are then projected onto the Flat Earth and the Dome. To optically connect a Flat Earth Observer with Celestial Objects on the Dome, visible from his position at the right Azimuth and Elevation, light has to be bent in the shown, in reality never observed ways. This Model fails already for Observers at an Altitude and has many other flaws.
This model requires that light bends differently for different observers depending on latitude. There is no known physics that explains how this could happen.
How does the "azimuthal grid of vision" know its latitude so it knows how to bend light as needed for a specific location, Witsit?
For the Globe Model however no projections and no weird latitude dependent light bending is required to match all observations for any observer on earth and in space without any flaws, because in reality the earth is a globe!
Source: http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Flat+Earth+Dome+Model
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/nGGJ
GPS Globe Map vs. Flat Earth’s Old Map
Google Earth
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/tBwEZ
Flat Earth Maps (pick the correct one)
Source: https://flatearth101.com/flat-earth-maps
Archive Copy: https://archive.is/yi3gI
Source: https://wiki.tfes.org/Flat_Earth_Maps
Archive Copy: https://archive.is/Hws3N
Source: https://wiki.tfes.org/Bi-Polar_Model
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/jy8oM
As with any fringe movement there are disagreements and several different flat-Earth models exist to choose from. Some models propose that the Earth’s edges are surrounded by a wall of ice holding in the oceans. Others suggest our flat planet and its atmosphere are encased in a huge, hemispherical snow globe from which nothing can fall off the edges. To account for night and day, most flat-Earthers think the Sun moves in circles around the North Pole, with its light acting like a spotlight. The most recent “US model”, for example, suggests that the Sun and Moon are 50 km in diameter and circle the disc-shaped Earth at a height of 5500 km, with the stars above this on a rotating dome. Many flat-Earthers also reject gravity, with the “UK model” suggesting that the disc is itself accelerating up at 9.8 m/s2 to give the illusion of gravity.
Source: https://physicsworld.com/a/fighting-flat-earth-theory/
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/vEoA7
Who Says You Cannot Fly Over Antarctica?
Become one of the few to witness the desolate beauty of this untamed polar landscape. Aboard our privately chartered aircraft you will experience unparalleled Antarctic viewing, with up to 4 hours over the white continent. With 19 different routes, no two flights are ever the same.
Source: https://www.antarcticaflights.com.au/
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/ADubN
https://youtu.be/SCQhIWsQJsI
If flying over Antarctica is out, how about flying over the North Pole? There’s a bit of a complication there. It’s feasible to fly to the north pole despite the difficulties and rarity of doing so, but it’s not as easy as it seems.
Flight controllers might, for example, refer to previous polar flights for guidance while preparing and leading an Arctic flight despite their rarity and the fact that they are typically discouraged.
This is not the situation in Antarctica, which means that pilots and controllers would be flying blind if they attempted a mission there.
Additionally, if your jet has difficulties, it can land at two emergency airports near the North Pole. However, this is not the case in Antarctica, making it even more deadly to fly over there.
It has long been considered an adventure to visit Antarctica because of the severe climate and danger. A flying firm that is exploring how to tackle these issues and increase its flight paths over Antarctica will continue to face these challenges in the future.
However, for the time being, it is mostly an ice no-fly zone.
Source: https://engineerine.com/the-secret-behind-not-flying-over-south/
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/W1F6l
Debunking Flat Earth: From Geomatics Perspective
Suez Canal Argument
Archive Copy: https://files.catbox.moe/ajvr04.pdf
How To Calculate The Curvature of the Earth
With the help of a simulation, I show, up to what altitudes the earth appears flat, although it actually has a spherical shape. Using some animations, you can learn how to recognize the curvature of the earth, or in what circumstances it appears flat. The simulation can also simulate refraction. I prove by means of photos, how the simulation depicts reality, by superimposing the simulation results onto photos.
Source: http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Finding+the+Curvature+of+the+Earth
Archive Copy: https://web.archive.org/web/20230425153358/http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Finding+the+Curvature+of+the+Earth
US Navy on Curvatuure of the Earth
Source: https://eugeneleeslover.com/USN-GUNS-AND-RANGE-TABLES/OP-770-1.html
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/VFrJS
US Army on Curvature of the Earth
Source: https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/tc3_09x81.pdf
Archive Copy: https://files.catbox.moe/vlcjy4.pdf
NASA on Curvature of the Earth
Flat-Earthers claimed to have exposed ‘a secret document’ from NASA, saying that Earth is flat & non-rotating. In reality, the document is simply a derivation of a flight dynamics problem, assuming flat and non-rotating Earth, which is a common assumption made to simplify flight models. It does not imply the Earth is flat and non-rotating.
Solving all problems in physics involves some simplification. As an example, a thrown ball is affected by many factors, including air resistance, Earth’s curvature, wind speed and direction, Earth’s rotation, Earth’s motion around the sun, the sun’s orbit around the galaxy, etc. If we want to calculate the path taken by the ball, a lot of these things can be left out, and the results will still be practically correct.
Using a flat and non-rotating model does not imply the Earth is flat and non-rotating, but the shape and motion of Earth exert too little influence over the problem, and we can afford to leave them out without affecting the final results. More complex and more accurate models are available if the problem warrants them.
Source: https://flatearth.ws/aircraft-model
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/Tbk6g
Source: https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/earthfact.html
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/QJMpf
Why Aren’t We Living in a Vacuum?
The Earth retains an atmosphere because gravity pulls air particles toward the center of the Earth. Without something affecting the air —like gravity— air particles would move toward lower pressure, and Earth would lose its atmosphere.
Source: https://flatearth.ws/atmosphere-vacuum
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/tyjNX
Gravity is holding the atmosphere down. But how does that work exactly? How does gravity keep the air in my room at a constant pressure?
All of the atmosphere is being pulled down towards the planet. The only reason why air rushes to fill a vacuum down on earth is because the molecules are bouncing around so much they just fill up any empty space.
Another thing you can see here, there isn't really an edge to the atmosphere, it just gets thinner and thinner, and the molecules get further and further apart. It never really ends though. Even in the space between galaxies, the hardest vacuum there is, there's still about one atom per cubic meter.
Source: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/why-does-the-atmosphere-not-fly-off-into-the-vacuum-of-space.10098/
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/tEGAD
200 Reasons the Earth is Not Flat
Let us first establish the baseline. The earth is a semi-ellipsoid - think of an egg. It's hanging about in space, rotating around the common centre of gravity of several systems. The most significant ones being the sun and moon - so we're on a sort of wobbly ellipse. Note that when I say sphere in the article, I usually just use it as a shortcut for discussing some shape. It's more of an ellipsoid, and then we add in geography.
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/BqY6h
Flat Earth Dome Model
I know that Flat Earthers misrepresent and misuse this model as "prove" of Flat Earth by lying about it and keeping secret the following:
This Flat Earth Dome Model can make correct predictions for many observations, because:
This Flat Earth Dome Model is entirely based on the Heliocentric Model and Newton's Laws of Gravitation and Motion for all calculations. It uses in the real world measured 3D Orbits, Constellations, Inclinations, Axial Tilts, Distances and Velocities, and the correct Sizes and Masses of Sun, Moon and Globe Earth to calculate all Observables, see Source Code: FE-Dome App.
The results from the calculations using the Heliocentric Model are then projected onto the Flat Earth and the Dome. To optically connect a Flat Earth Observer with Celestial Objects on the Dome, visible from his position at the right Azimuth and Elevation, light has to be bent in the shown, in reality never observed ways. This Model fails already for Observers at an Altitude and has many other flaws.
This model requires that light bends differently for different observers depending on latitude. There is no known physics that explains how this could happen.
How does the "azimuthal grid of vision" know its latitude so it knows how to bend light as needed for a specific location, Witsit?
For the Globe Model however no projections and no weird latitude dependent light bending is required to match all observations for any observer on earth and in space without any flaws, because in reality the earth is a globe!
Source: http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Flat+Earth+Dome+Model
Archive Copy: https://web.archive.org/web/20230713182710/http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Flat+Earth+Dome+Model
Is David Weiss a Fraud?
Listed below are several posts that debunk flat Earth claims made by DITRH (David Weiss) on his YouTube channel...
1. David Weiss - caught cherry picking his comments at DITRH to make himsefl look better, and does not know math
http://flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/831-david-weiss-caught-cherry-picking-his-comments-at-ditrh-to-make-himself-look-better
2. DITRH (David Weiss) - Flat Earth 'rs are dumb - David guilty of cherry picking comments for deletion
http://flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/599-ditrh-david-weiss-guilty-of-cherry-picking-comments-for-deletion
3. Yip Yap Mind Control on a Flat Earth
http://flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/130-ditrh-yip-yap-mind-control-on-a-flat-earth
4. Flat Earth Petition Call To Action (MIRROR)
http://flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/131-ditrh-flat-earth-petition-call-to-action-mirror
5. Day and night side by side on a FLAT EARTH
http://flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/132-ditrh-day-and-night-side-by-side-on-a-flat-earth
6. Is NASA a bunch of liars and frauds? Flat Earth
http://flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/133-ditrh-is-nasa-a-bunch-of-liars-and-frauds-flat-earth
7. How long will you keep quiet?
http://flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/134-ditrh-how-long-will-you-keep-quiet
8. The lunar wave over a Flat Earth
http://flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/135-ditrh-the-lunar-wave-over-a-flat-earth
9. Gravity vs The Vacuum. (SPOILER ALERT Gravity dies) #FlatEarth
http://flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/136-ditrh-gravity-vs-the-vacuum-spoiler-alert-gravity-dies
10. Caught deleting video comments that expose his fabricated delusion - Around the World on a Flat Earth
http://flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/800-ditrh-david-weiss-caught-deleting-video-comments-that-expose-his-fabricated-delusion-around-the-world-on-a-flat-earth
11. David's iPhone flat Earth app - debunked
Flat Earth Sun & Moon Clock - app fails to accurately show the positions of sunrise and sunset (among other failures)
This iPhone app was created by folks who have an agenda to change your mind about reality. They are Biblical literalist dedicated flat Earth believers.
Contrary to their misguided belief system, the Earth is a beautiful blue globe, rotating on an axis, and orbiting the Sun once every year. No amount of flat Earth conspiracy will ever change that.
This app is actually one of the best evidences that the Earth is not flat, and that their AE (Azimuthal Equidistant) world model is incorrect. The YouTube video listed below shows that on this app, the position of the sun at sunrise and sunset - are not correct. Just go out at sunset and look to the west. Check the app and you will see that the app Sun's position is not where the Sun really is at that time of evening. Same for sunrise.
Flat Earther's new App debunks their own model. Why would they do that?, by Wolfie6020
Source: https://www.flatearthlunacy.com/index.php/2-uncategorised/129-ditrh-david-weiss
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/tkodW
I Can See Chicago From Michigan 🤦♂️
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/9opAw
Source: https://physicsworld.com/a/fighting-flat-earth-theory/
Archive Copy: https://archive.ph/S1NIN
Resources
https://flatearthbusted.blogspot.com/
https://www.metabunk.org/forums/Flat-Earth/
End