What is the difference between a Flat Earther and a Creationist?

[Uncommon Sense]

I don’t adhere to either or ~ but can listen to both sides. They both make a lot of sense in many ways and both have challenges.

The most difficult for the flat earth side is being unable to zoom back in on the sun once it vanishes.

 

[Uncommon Sense]

I am trying to remember the name of a video that I saw with an interesting experiment. Countless people around the world measured the direction to the Sun all at the same time. These were then plotted two different ways. With a simulation using a globe Earth and one using a Flat Earth. Guess which one gave consistent results?

They both give consistent results for their own respective beliefs on the distance the sun away from earth and size of sun and earth.

 

[nPeace]

I like how Atheists and evolution believers get together to have a chat about their favorite doctrine. How cute.

 

[Uncommon Sense]

I’m just not as naive or willing to believe stuff as easily if the locals and common folks don’t have access to be able to perform and repeat certain experiments. We don’t have access to the Hubble ~ or other technology per say that a select few do.

 

[Uncommon Sense]

And seeing the photos presented from NASA of the earth, from year to year ~ the sizes of countries are all different, and their photos are of a perfect sphere, not an oblate spheroid.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They both give consistent results for their own respective beliefs on the distance the sun away from earth and size of sun and earth.

I seriously doubt that. Give me a model of the Sun for Flerfers. I am betting that it gives you a changing observed size of the Sun.

 

[Uncommon Sense]

I like how Atheists and evolution believers get together to have a chat about their favorite doctrine. How cute.

All it takes is a specific thread and some words ~ and they all come from the woodwork when they’re wound up. I’m even closer to a lot of atheistic doctrines and also evolution ~ but not afraid to admit if any other side can’t make compelling points also. But that takes an open mind.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And seeing the photos presented from NASA of the earth, from year to year ~ the sizes of countries are all different, and their photos are of a perfect sphere, not an oblate spheroid.

Are you trying to say that the size of countries varies? If that is the case you are incorrect. Countries will look a bit different depending upon the satellite's distance to the Earth. And the picture does show an oblate spheroid, but the difference is so small that you cannot see it with the naked eye.

 

[nPeace]

Not uniformly 'upward', no. But yes, an increase of complexity.

But we *don't* expect to see major increases of complexity as what you would call macroevolution in the short time periods we have been studying this stuff. Any time period less than the *short* period of, say, 50,000 years is going to be way too short to see major changes.

So, no, we don't expect to see such changes in our 'breeding experiments'.

On the other hand, we also see no *barriers* to the small changes adding up over time to produce big changes.

A good analogy is how languages change over time. If you go back 2000 years, there was no English language. Even if you only go back 800 years, the ancestor of English was so different as to be a different language.

In each generation, the change in the language was small enough that the speakers did not notice the changes. But, from the Old English (a very different language) came the Modern English we are writing in today.

And, for example, in the last 2000 years, we see the 'evolution' of Spanish and French from the old Latin language. At no point was there a first 'French speaker'. At each generation, everyone understood those around them. Yet, over longer periods of time, the languages change and new ones appear.

The same happens, only much slower, with biological evolution. The changes in each generation are small. In fact, even if you look over hundreds of generations, the changes are small. But, when you look at longer time periods, the changes are large and we see these changes in the fossil record.

In other words, it's not observed. It's assumed.
Imagine if that kind of reasoning were real science.
We have barriers in nature, between living kinds, but none must exist where evolution is concerned.
Says who? Says the genie in the bottle.

Thank God we know certain things for sure. Otherwise, I believe they would assume that horses interbreeding with zebras would one day produce ...

 

[Subduction Zone]

All it takes is a specific thread and some words ~ and they all come from the woodwork when they’re wound up. I’m even closer to a lot of atheistic doctrines and also evolution ~ but not afraid to admit if any other side can’t make compelling points also. But that takes an open mind.

An open mind is all well and good but to believe in a Flat Earth one's brain has to have fallen out.

 

[Uncommon Sense]

I seriously doubt that. Give me a model of the Sun for Flerfers. I am betting that it gives you a changing observed size of the Sun.

 

[Uncommon Sense]

to believe in a Flat Earth one's brain has to have fallen out.

I know there is somewhere in you that can communicate without unnecessary words such as these.

 

[Uncommon Sense]

I do so want to be 'honest' with myself and accept that the earth is flat even as all observable planets are spherical-ish.

No different that say that since billiard balls are spherical, the pool table must be spherical too then. And then some will say that time is bent and curved in space causing everything to appear spherical.

Please explain gravity on a pizza pie earth.

A lot of people wonder how birds and flies and butterflies, etc. carry on just fine without gravity. Not subjected to gravity? Now ~ I already know that you’d respond by it only working on larger masses. Yet not a single being can detect or experiment with any gravity at home for some reason.

 

[Uncommon Sense]

I mean ~ anyone who believes in curved water ~ sideways and upside down curved water ~ sideways people and upside down people ~ an earth and atmosphere spinning at 1000 miles per hour, just because they see pictures from an elite few, and were indoctrinated that way ~ feel free too. This may be true but also sounds pretty silly.

 

[Uncommon Sense]

Are you trying to say that the size of countries varies? If that is the case you are incorrect. Countries will look a bit different depending upon the satellite's distance to the Earth. And the picture does show an oblate spheroid, but the difference is so small that you cannot see it with the naked eye.

Where is the oblate? “A bit” different here?

 

[Subduction Zone]

View attachment 31891 View attachment 31892 View attachment 31893

Your poorly drawn model refutes itself. It shows a Sun that should shrink in size as it approaches the horizon.

 

[Subduction Zone]

View attachment 31898

Where is the oblate? “A bit” different here?

LMAO!! There is no change in size, the arrows to go different areas.

Also I already told you that the small amount of oblate shape is not discernable to the naked eye.

Seriously are you a poe?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I know there is somewhere in you that can communicate without unnecessary words such as these.

Why object to the truth? There has to be something seriously wrong with someone to believe in the flat earth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I mean ~ anyone who believes in curved water ~ sideways and upside down curved water ~ sideways people and upside down people ~ an earth and atmosphere spinning at 1000 miles per hour, just because they see pictures from an elite few, and were indoctrinated that way ~ feel free too. This may be true but also sounds pretty silly.

Okay, you have to be a poe.

 

[Polymath257]

In other words, it's not observed. It's assumed.

Only if you think we can't use information now to determine things about the past.

Imagine if that kind of reasoning were real science.

Don't have to imagine that because it *is* real science.

We have barriers in nature, between living kinds, but none must exist where evolution is concerned.

Really? Just like there are barriers between languages?

Care to provide actual evidence for such barriers?

Says who? Says the genie in the bottle.

Thank God we know certain things for sure. Otherwise, I believe they would assume that horses interbreeding with zebras would one day produce ...

Nope. That would be a mammal with six 'limbs'. Not to mention that feathers are a characteristic of a completely different evolutionary line.