Request for peer review of my flat Earth disproofs

[darren r]

I'm assuming Flat Earthers believe that there is a conspiracy to conceal the Earth's true nature, no doubt spearheaded by NASA, the Illuminati and the Freemasons.

Have any of them ever come up with an even halfway cogent argument as to how anyone would profit from this deception?

[bknight]

I'm assuming Flat Earthers believe that there is a conspiracy to conceal the Earth's true nature, no doubt spearheaded by NASA, the Illuminati and the Freemasons.

Have any of them ever come up with an even halfway cogent argument as to how anyone would profit from this deception?

To know /present the "truth" that we (most of us) have been programmed since early childhood.

[Gazpar]

I'm assuming Flat Earthers believe that there is a conspiracy to conceal the Earth's true nature, no doubt spearheaded by NASA, the Illuminati and the Freemasons.

Have any of them ever come up with an even halfway cogent argument as to how anyone would profit from this deception?

Flat earthers argue science is itself a conspiracy. They are from the anti-science crowd in nature and they usually take a very religious stance against it.
They say that every scientific discovery is made to remove our special biblical place in their universe (flat disk under a dome) since they think the bible the is only and only litteral truth.
So they must make this claims:

1)Space doesnt exists. There isnt billions galaxies and trillions of stars. The big bang is a hoax. Every picture from space is CGI, paints or composites(although their evidence for that is vague or nonexistent). Exoplanets dont exist. The sun is not 93 millions miles away. Photos from other planets are a hoax. Basically, astronomy, astrophysics, astronautics and several fields related to the study of space is made up or fake to deceive the masses.

2) Space travel is fake, therefore Apollo was fake too. Their hate on Apollo and NASA is so gigantic, that if there werent any laws to protect NASA staff, I dont know what would this people do but im pretty sure nasty things in my opinion. When they ask you if apollo was fake and you respond NO, they will take you for an indoctrinated sheep and laughing stock. ISS is a fake inflatable.

3) 400 year old science is wrong and its just fake experiments (unless its suits their arguments). Some of them argue Newton didnt exist (not surprising)

4) Biological evolution is a hoax and that fossills are a fake because it removes our special place in the universe.

5) That ancient cultures who believed the earth was flat go it right and the others are wrong.

6) Antartica is guarded by supersoldiers to prevent people to see the truth (although there are thousands of people who vacation in that place)

7) Physics and mathematics are just assumptions (they outright deny it unless it suits their arguments)

Every evidence against the flat earth is fake by default. So for them, southern stars dont exist, non-stop or long flights dont exist for example.

9) Every scientist, engineer, pilot, etc is paid to hide the truth. That means millions of people are part of it.

10) Education is a massive indoctrination program to brainwash the people.

11) Be geometrically illiterate.

All this while they use a computer to spread their nonsense, use medicine, use a car, use cellphone, use internet, eat food. Basically they are the biggest hypocrites ever to exist.
I dont know what there is to gain from this worldwide conspiracy other than "religious" reasons since an "elite" with this kind of power and resources have unlimited money.
This people, in my humble opinion, have very big egos. They are very narcissistic or they are so bored with their life that they must invent a fantasy to make it more enjoyable. This ridiculous movement has gained so much momentum this months that it went from being a few lonely paranoids on youtube to a full blown crowd of them.
Their gurus are liars and scammers. If you ever see their videos, be cautious because they are already milking out their gullible fanbase.

[Dalhousie]

See what happens when they throw time zones at them.

[AstroBrant]

One aspect, and I'm not sure this is what you are looking for but..

A long time ago when tall ships sailed, they came into view from the top of the mast downward.  How would a FE explain this?

EDIT:  I see you have included this viewpoint in image #14!

To answer your question about what would they say, I have seen three of them in the last few days who proclaim proudly that such videos prove the earth is flat! No, I'm not kidding.

[AstroBrant]

I'm assuming Flat Earthers believe that there is a conspiracy to conceal the Earth's true nature, no doubt spearheaded by NASA, the Illuminati and the Freemasons.

Have any of them ever come up with an even halfway cogent argument as to how anyone would profit from this deception?

Haven't seen any claims about Illuminati yet, but NASA and Freemasons, yes. And Jesuits. It's amazing how many of them blame NASA for the whole concept of spherical Earth.

[AstroBrant]

Looks like Gazpar has been around the block with these people. To add to the list, they also deny gravity. And they say the sun doesn't rise and set. It just gets too far away to see, and the rising and setting is due to "the law of perspective" or optical illusion.

For those who aren't aware of the "modern" flat Earth model, they believe in the UN flag style map, with the North Pole at the center, and all celestial objects circle around about 3000 miles above the earth. The sun orbits around the North Pole, going from tropic to tropic for the seasons.

[AstroBrant]

You only need one.

Most of these are to complicated, it will just make the eyes glaze over of the kind of person who would fall for such B.S. in the first place.

I've pointed out that each argument, all by itself, is a disproof of flat Earth. One reason I included so many, and might include more, is as a resource for people arguing against flat-Earthers. But you're right, many flat Earthers just won't "get it" where most of those arguments are concerned. That's why I like the Octans argument being #1. If they're only up to absorbing one argument, that one is pretty simple.

[AstroBrant]

Be careful not to cite videos of the earth's horizon from high altitude balloons. We've made a few of these ourselves (I help mentor a local high school ham club) and I've noticed that the shape of the horizon changes quite a bit as the camera moves. I.e., it's geometric distortion by the lens.

Good point, and I will certainly not use anything like that. I've pointed out several times to people on both sides of this argument, that those are no good as proof either way because of the wide-angle lenses that are usually used. I am trying to keep all of my arguments either geometrical or ground-based observational.

[AstroBrant]

That said, one of the oldest is still one of the best: Eratosthenes' estimate of the diameter of the earth.

The only objection I would have to that is that he had to make an assumption of a very distant sun. Also, since these people believe the sun is only 3000 miles high, I would not be able to make a point with that.

I would prefer Al Biruni's calculations using a mountain and a plain and figuring out the degree of curvature trigonometrically. That turned out to be remarkably accurate and was done a thousand years ago.

[Gazpar]

It just gets too far away to see, and the rising and setting is due to "the law of perspective".

Thats wrong. For the sun to appear set or rise on the horizon it must be at an infinite distance from you but its degrees above the horizon never reaches 0.
I hate when they use perspective without knowing how it works.

or optical illusion.

Thats an excuse from them in my opinion. Everything that contradicts their delusion is an optical illusion. The same happens with their math: If it supports flat earth, they will use it. If it does not support the flat earth, they will deny it, call it BS, quote Tesla or Einstein or that is just assumptions.

[AstroBrant]

You forgot about one thing, solar eclipses.

If you havent seen this video from david, I suggest you to do it:

Anyways, good luck using math, logic and common sense with this people.

I was also thinking about doing that. It should be a good one.

As for David's video, yes, I saw it when he first uploaded it. He does terrific work, both with his arguments and with his graphics. I'm jealous! Now he just needs to list the darn thing. I'm thinking about making a video using my Photobucket disproofs, as well. Not nearly as cool as his stuff, but pretty comprehensive.

[AstroBrant]

Also, astrobrant, the picture explaining orbital mechanics in a flat earth is wrong.
Flat earthers dont believe satellites exists or that any kind of space travel does.

I know they don't believe in satellites, so I've wondered if that one would serve any purpose.
I may end up replacing that one, but I'm still curious about what was wrong with the orbital mechanics.

[Gazpar]

You forgot about one thing, solar eclipses.

If you havent seen this video from david, I suggest you to do it:

Anyways, good luck using math, logic and common sense with this people.

I was also thinking about doing that. It should be a good one.

As for David's video, yes, I saw it when he first uploaded it. He does terrific work, both with his arguments and with his graphics. I'm jealous! Now he just needs to list the darn thing. I'm thinking about making a video using my Photobucket disproofs, as well. Not nearly as cool as his stuff, but pretty comprehensive.

Very cool video, yes. Still, flat earthers are fact resistant to it. You should make one too since you know what you are dealing with.
I hope he finish it and get us a more detailed video. What would be hilarous is the amount of dislikes it would get if he makes it public.

[Gazpar]

Also, astrobrant, the picture explaining orbital mechanics in a flat earth is wrong.
Flat earthers dont believe satellites exists or that any kind of space travel does.

I know they don't believe in satellites, so I've wondered if that one would serve any purpose.
I may end up replacing that one, but I'm still curious about what was wrong with the orbital mechanics.

Well, ground based GPS still needs satellites...