"When Columbus lived, people thought that the earth was flat. They believed the Atlantic Ocean to be filled with monsters large enough to devour their ships, and with fearful waterfalls over which their frail vessels would plunge to destruction. Columbus had to fight these foolish beliefs in order to get men to sail with him. He felt sure the earth was round."
-Emma Miler Bolenius, American Schoolbook Author, 1919
One of the most enduring myths that children grow up with is the idea that Columbus was the only one of his time who believed that the Earth was round; everyone else believed it was flat. "How brave the sailors of 1492 must have been," you might imagine, "to travel towards the edge of the world without fear of falling off!"
Indeed, there are many ancient references to the Earth being shaped like a disc. And if you knew only of the two most important astronomical objects in the sky -- the Sun and the Moon -- you yourself might reach the same conclusions.
If you go outside during sunset a day or two after the new moon, here's the sight you're likely to encounter.
A thin sliver of Moon, where the illuminated portion appears to coincide with the same portion of a sphere that could be lit up by the Sun.
If you were both curious and scientifically-minded, you might go out after sunset during the next few days to see what happened next. In fact, if you were to go outside and look towards the southwest skies (assuming you, like me, live in the Northern hemisphere) during the coming days of September 29th to October 3rd, at sunset (~6:30 PM) each night, you'd notice something changing about the Moon.
Not only does it appear to shift position by about 12 degrees each night, moving farther away from the Sun, but it appears that progressively more and more of it gets illuminated! And you would (rightly) conclude that perhaps the Moon orbits the Earth, and that its apparent change in phase is caused by light from the Sun illuminating different parts of a spherically-shaped Moon.
In fact, this is both the ancient and modern view of what causes the phases of the Moon.
But about twice a year, something special happens during the Full Moon that allows us to determine something about the shape of the Earth: a lunar eclipse! When the Moon is full and the Earth passes directly between the Sun and the Moon, the Earth's shadow shows up on the Moon's surface!
And if you look at the shadow that actually shows up on the surface of the Moon, you can clearly see that the Earth's shadow is curved, and shaped like a disc!
But this doesn't tell you whether the Earth is a flat disc or a round sphere; it only tells you that the shadow cast by the Earth is circular. In principle, just from looking at the Moon, the Earth could be either flat or round.
But contrary to popular belief, this question wasn't settled in the 1400s and 1500s (with Magellan's circumnavigation of the globe), but more than 2,000 years ago, in the ancient world! And what's perhaps most amazing? It was done using nothing more than the Sun. Here's how.
If you follow the Sun's path through the daytime sky, and you live in the Northern hemisphere, you'll find that it rises in the eastern part of the sky, rises up to its apex in the south, and then lowers and sets in the west. And it does this every day of the year.
But it doesn't take the exact same path every day out of the year; the Sun reaches a much higher point (and shines for more hours during the day) during the summer months, and reaches a significantly lower point (and shines for fewer hours) during the winter. To dramatically illustrate this, here's a time-lapse photo of the Sun's path through the sky taken during the winter solstice in Fairbanks, Alaska.
In fact, if you charted out the Sun's path through the daytime sky, you would find that it takes its lowest path (for the fewest number of hours) on the Winter Solstice -- usually December 21st -- and its highest path (for the greatest number of hours) on the Summer Solstice, usually June 21st.
If you constructed a camera capable of photographing the Sun's path through the sky over the course of the year, you would find exactly this: a series of arcs, where the highest, longest arc through the sky was made during the Summer Solstice and the lowest, shortest arc was made during the Winter Solstice.
And in the ancient world, the greatest scholars and scientists from Egypt, Greece, and all over the Mediterranean went to work at the Library of Alexandria. One of these scientists was the Ancient Greek Astronomer, Eratosthenes of Cyrene.
While living in Alexandria, Eratosthenes received some amazing correspondence from the city of Syene in southern Egypt. In particular, it said that, on the Summer Solstice,
the shadow of someone looking down a deep well would block the reflection of the Sun at noon.
In other words, the Sun would be directly overhead at this time, not a single degree to the South, North, East or West. And if you had a completely vertical object, it would cast absolutely no shadow.
But Eratosthenes knew that this wasn't the case where he was, in Alexandria. Sure, the Sun came closer to being directly overhead at Noon on the Summer Solstice in Alexandria than at any other time during the year, but vertical objects still cast shadows.
And -- like any good scientist -- Eratosthenes did the experiment. By measuring the length of the shadow cast by a vertical stick during the solstice noon, he could figure out what angle the Sun made with the vertical direction at Alexandria.
And the answer he got was one-fiftieth of a circle, or 7.2 degrees. But at this time, in Syene, the angle the Sun was making with an identical vertical stick was zero degrees! What could be causing this? In perhaps a stroke of genius, Eratosthenes realized that the Sun's rays could all be parallel, and that the Earth could be curved!
If he could then figure out the distance from Alexandria to Syene, since he knew the angular difference between the two cities, he could figure out the circumference of the Earth! If only Eratosthenes had a grad student, he could have sent one to make the trip, and measure the distance!
Instead, he was forced to rely on the reported distance between the two cities. The most "precise" measurement of his day?
Travel-by-camel. (So I can understand criticisms of his accuracy.) Nevertheless, his results were that the distance between Syene and Alexandria were 5,000 stadia. The question, of course, is how big is a stadium? The answer depends, of course, on whether Eratosthenes, a Greek living in Egypt, was using an Attic stadium or an Egyptian stadium, something still debated among historians. An Attic stadium was used more commonly, and is 185 meters in modern terms. Using this value, one gets a circumference of the Earth of 46,620 kilometers, a number that's only about 16% bigger than the actual value.
However, an Egyptian stadium is 157.5 meters, and it's conceivable that's what Eratosthenes meant. In that case, we get a value of 39,375 kilometers, which is off by less than 2% from the modern value of 40,041 km!
Regardless of what the actual values were, Eratosthenes went on to become the world's first geographer, inventing the concepts of latitude and longitude that we still use today, and constructed the first models and maps based on a spherical Earth.
Although many things were "lost" during the subsequent millenium, neither the idea of a spherical Earth nor the rough knowledge of the Earth's circumference were one of them. In fact, anyone can perform this same experiment today with two locations at the same longitude, and with simultaneous measurements of shadow lengths, you too can measure the circumference of the Earth! Not bad, considering that the first direct, photographic evidence of the Earth's curvature would not arrive until 1946!
Once we knew the shape and size of the Earth -- from about 240 B.C. -- we were able to figure out all sorts of remarkable things, including the size of and distance to the Moon! So give the credit where credit is due, to Eratosthenes, for discovering the Earth was round, and performing the first accurate calculation of its size!
If there's anything Columbus should be known for, as respects the size and shape of the Earth, it was using unrealistically low numbers for the circumference of the Earth! His estimates, that he used to convince others that one could sail from Europe directly to India (were the Americas non-existant), were absurdly small! Had the Americas not existed, he and his crew surely would have starved before reaching Asia!
Hmmm, I hope you don't consider an image a more direct proof than Magellan's trip around the world...
Yes, Aristarchus was right, however: if you imagine the Sun as a certain height above a flat Earth, then the angle of shadows would also change with whatever "latitude" was (although not in quite the same way.)
Who knows maybe they will finally discover what makes a TickleMe Plant suddenly close its fern like leaves and lower it branches when Tickled! http://www.ticklemeplant.com
Neil @2: while you can explain one pair of shadow observations that way, if the distances between the observation isn't great, you can't explain 3, or 2 widely spaced with 1 very far north. Put another way, as you get closer to the pole, the length of the shadow at the equinox goes to infinity. But you know htat the distance between the pole and the other measurement isn't infinite. so the earth must be round.
Ethan, lovely post, thanks. always enjoy this blog.
Great post! I think the best explanation of this was by Carl Sagan, in Cosmos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8cbIWMv0rI
A quick question and a comment:
Were similar discoveries made elsewhere, independently? I'm thinking specifically of China and Central/South America, both of which had well-developed astronomical knowledge as well.
Regarding Columbus, I've read speculation (in Lies My Teacher Told Me, I think) that he had heard rumors of new lands to the west, and didn't really plan on finding the Orient.
Greek astronomy produced the Ptolemaic model of the solar system, which works surprisingly well, despite its geocentrism. Aristarchus proposed a heliocentric model. The interesting thing is that Greek astronomers rejected heliocentrism on empirical grounds: if the earth revolved around the earth, they deduced there should be a parallax. Which was not observed. Hypothesis. Experiment. Data. Test.
Well, we know there is a parallax. We have better instruments. The stars are just far too distant for ancient observation to detect it.
Greek astronomy was amazingly good science. The sad thing is that the Almagest was current science more than a millennium after it was written.
I always thought that was fascinating myself. Columbus had the wrong number for the diameter of the Earth, and tried to convince anyone who would listen to set out an expedition westward to India, on the basis that his diameter/circumference calculations showed that it was survivable. Nobody wanted to fund it, as they all knew that the earth was much bigger than that, and anyone on such a mission would starve to death at sea. Nobody knew that there was actually an enormous landmass at a sailable distance from Europe, filled with natives who, unfortunately for them, were rather naive in the ways of Europeans and possessed much lower technology than them.
Makes me wonder if there's any merit to theories like psweet read...
I know he was the first to calculate its size, but I've never before heard Eratosthenes credited with discovering that the Earth was roughly spherical to begin with. A more common story is that people first noticed the curvature of the Earth in the way that ships appeared or disappeared over the horizon -- mast first (coming) or last (going).
After a bit of Googling, I find the ships-over-the-horizon argument, along with some others, attributed to Aristotle, about a century before Eratosthenes.
Like Neil said, if the sun were much closer to the earth, it's light rays would not be parallel and Eratosthenes' observations would be consistent with a flat earth. Did he have some reason to believe that his assumption that the sun's rays are parallel when they reach Earth was valid? I've wondered this for a long time, since I first saw Cosmos, maybe someone here knows.
They must have realized the moon was a sphere. A disc would be fully illuminated once the flat surface of the disc faced the sun even at a slight angle. The smooth curve of the shadow marching steadily across the moon's surface must have shouted,"spherical".
As nemo said, Eratosthenes was interested in a method for calculating the size of the Earth. Aristotle, well before him, gave the principle arguments for its sphericity, which likely predated him.
@Russell: of course the Greeks rejected heliocentrism on empirical grounds, because there was no empirical evidence of the earth's motion. Mathematically, it accounts for the phenomena just fine, but in physical terms, and in terms of their own experience (and our everyday experience, for that matter), it was absurd to think that the Earth actually moved.
Why is it sad that the Almagest was science for a Millenium? It speaks to the power of Ptolemy as an extraordinarily successful astronomer and the predictive power of his system, for those who had access to it. There was no need to replace it, until Tycho Brahe's extensive observations made at the end of the 16th century compelled Kepler to abandon ancient principles of astronomy (Copernicus' system was no more accurate than Ptolemy's).
I've never quite understood the notion that only moderns realized steady motion is imperceptible. Every sailor will tell you that the motion you feel on a boat isn't its progress through the water, but the lateral rocking of waves, which is worst when in irons, and least when everything is trimmed well.
And every other Greek was a sailor.
For the very curious, the first written allusion to the notion the Earth is spherical that I've ever come across not only predates Eratosthenes, but also predates Aristotle by a good century.
In his epic Histories, Herodotus talks about the origins of the Nile river farther south in Egypt. The last idea he gives is one he heard talking to someone in Egypt, who says that it comes from mountains far to the South, where it gets colder than the more temperate climates in the north, an allusion to the fact that on a round Earth, there would be an equator, and if you traveled towards either of the poles, you would encounter cooler overall temperatures. And of course, Herodotus, after relating this story, concludes that of course that's absurd, because everyone knows that things get colder in the north, not the south!
There's actually very little evidence that anyone educated ever believed the world was flat. There were some ancient Greeks that hypothesized that the earth was cylindrical, but that's as close as it got. There's a much simpler way of observing that the Earth is curved and it is something that most people living in Greece would have had fairly regular experience. If you watch a ship disappear over the horizon, you see that the bottom of the ship disappears first, while the mast is the last thing to pass beyond the horizon.
It's not surprising that the lie about a flat earth gets perpetuated. The story of the far sighted Columbus standing up to the Queen of England who thought the world was flat and setting sail to discover America, makes a grand myth in keeping with America's subsequent history. The truth that the Queen correctly told Columbus he was an idiot who had miscalculated the circumference of the earth and would run out of supplies, doesn't quite fit so well with the rest of the mythology.
AFAIK, the idea of a spherical Earth is attributed to the School of Pythagoras (possibly the man himself), but they were only theorists. Erathostenes was the first to do a real life test. His result is inaccurate in part because Syene (modern Aswan) isn't exactly on the Tropic of Cancer.
But Aristoteles, Pythagoras, etc. are just the European branch of history. The best proof of round Earth is that the starts change when the latitude changes. The Mediterranean is not a good place to discover it, because it is long in east-west-direction, but narrow in north-south.
There were other places where navigators sailed much further in N-S, and used stars to get their latitude. I'm not sure who was the first, but it is well known that the Polynesians navigated with a spherical Earth model, and they must have it figured out by the time they reached Fiji more than 3000 years ago. And before they got that far, people were boating along the East Asian coast from Malay Peninsula to Japan. And who knows what happened along the eastern coast of Africa?
Nice post. I have posted a codicil to it at PaleoJudaica, explaining how Columbus got that unrealistically low estimate of the earth's size.
Of course, Columbus thought the earth was round, but SMALLER than everyone else thought it was. He thought he was travelling to India and the Far East when he landed on the Americas.
Hence North American Indians, as opposed to North American Aborigines.
He wasn't discovering America, he was discovering a shorter path to the Far East.
The Norse were the first sea-bourne Europeans to get to North America.
"Did he have some reason to believe that his assumption that the sun's rays are parallel when they reach Earth was valid?"
Yes, they knew that the sun was a long distance away.
"measurements by Aristarchus of Samos (310 BC â 230 BC) of the positions of the Sun and Moon when the Moon is at quarter phase (half lit), allowed him to use triginometery to estimate the ratio of distances to these two objects. His crude estimate of 1200 Earth radii (about 8 million kilometers), although far from the modern value of 150 million kilometers, was quite good considering their lack of modern observational tools like telescopes."
You can do the same thing with Venus.
"if the sun were much closer to the earth, it's light rays would not be parallel and Eratosthenes' observations would be consistent with a flat earth."
However, your distance to the sun would be far too close and you'd have much vaster cooling as you went "north" (since the cooler latitudes are the result of the angle of the ground cf the direction to the sun).
The existence of the Arctic 24-hour night also disproves it.
I.e. the Arctic would never be able to be in complete darkness, since only an infinite planar earth could produce just an eternal sunset, and we know that you don't walk infinity miles to get to the arctic circle.
Multiple lines of evidence.
PS how come nobody here's complained about how the consensus science of a round earth is not science at all, just proof that if you want to get ahead in science you have to agree to a round world..?
@Wow: Because they've all been silenced by Big Round Earth, obviously.
@ wow: also because there is no huge industry that makes billions of dollars off people believing the earth is flat, who can then buy out all the politicians, and stage a Congressional panel where, one by one, state senators all announce that they sincerely believe the earth is flat.
Believe me, if the money was there, they would do just that.
@Randy, or "fell off" the edge of the world... !
OK, thanks to Wow (often putting many helpful points up, do you have your own blog etc?) for reference to Aristarchus - the article rightly referred to Eratosthenes as being first, but I am reminded (and had that running in my head) that Aristarchus had more completely figured out the "big picture" for why the Earth had to be round, in that the Sun was too far away for the shadow angles to vary because of its height above a flat surface. BTW, sure there are many reasons why the latitudinal difference can't be just the Sun above a flat Earth, but naturally my point was off the top of the head and directed to, "but would scholars at time Eratosthenes made his case, have known enough to know the difference." In reflection, I suppose it's rather "obvious" that differential lengths of days would prove the point, but that's something more ancient peoples like Egyptians and Hebrews (butt of science v. fundamentalism jokes because of Biblical descriptions couched as flat-earth) would know. So, did *they* (or their best scholars) figure the Earth must be round?
Matt: I can believe that about Columbus v. the Queen, but then how did CC get away with calling the native peoples of the Americas, "Indians" that we still bizarrely use today? It seems to me, there should have been big push back right away and the early recognition that CC had found a "new world", so it's odd how that misleading name stuck.
mountains far to the South, where it gets colder than the more temperate climates in the north
This is not necessarily evidence of a spherical Earth. I'm not sure whether the ancient Greeks would have known this, but their contemporaries in China and India almost certainly did: The climate generally gets colder as you go to higher elevations. Many national capitals (e.g., Mexico City, Quito, Nairobi) are at high elevation because the climate is more temperate than at low elevations at the same latitude.
Regarding Columbus, I've read speculation (in Lies My Teacher Told Me, I think) that he had heard rumors of new lands to the west, . .
The suggestion I heard was that, until relatively soon before he sailed, Greenland was still represented by a bishop in Rome. Columbus, who is said to have visited Iceland, knew about this and extrapolated south. Of course, that does not explain why he was convinced he had reached the Indies.
"often putting many helpful points up, do you have your own blog etc?"
That'd be more work for me.
If I post on others, though, it's not.
"the article rightly referred to Eratosthenes as being first"
I think he was the first to measure the diameter, though we don't know the units any more, and our "guess" at what length that is in our system gives a suspiciously accurate answer...
"BTW, sure there are many reasons why the latitudinal difference can't be just the Sun above a flat Earth"
Well sunsets happen differently too on a flat world: you'd only get the same length of shadow at sunrise and sunset if you were in the middle.
The error of "the same length" attribution then gives you a minimum size to the earth.
But the sun appears to travel at a uniform angular distance over the sky, and that means a circular orbit, so that gives a maximum size of the earth.
Which is smaller than the minimum worked out earlier.
Worse, because you can measure the same shadow difference at widely spaced Eastern and Western locations, you have a MUCH larger minimum size of the earth, since your baseline can't be more than a certain fraction of the size of the earth.
(NOTE: Not that this is how it was done, but how it COULD be done by the inquisitive)
The only shape that wherever you are, you're in the middle of the surface is a sphere.
To an extent, there's absolutely no problem with a round earth for almost every religion apart from Abrahamic ones (which also has pi=3, natch). After all, the earth is a god, so that's why we don't fall off a round earth. Goddidit. And the Sun doesn't fall down like we do because THAT'S a god too.
"So, did *they* (or their best scholars) figure the Earth must be round?"
The christian theologians knew that the earth was round because they were one of the few people who kept the books of the ancient world alive in the Dark Ages.
But Holy Writ implied otherwise. Rather than confuse the laity with "It's not literal" which would lead the unsophisticated to think "Well, is the doctrine of heaven and hell not literal too?" which would be discomforting, they told the laity that the earth was flat.
Those educated (which was often by Church scholars) could be trusted because they would understand that the earth shape isn't important, God's Existence was. You have to get them young to ensure they believe in God before you can tell them the Bible isn't 100% true and accurate.
The scholars of the time certainly had the capability to check for themselves, and they also (pre Dark Age) had the access to the teachings that would tell them of a round earth.
But this is where Ptolemy REALLY screwed the pooch for science.
He INSISTED that you could discern the truth by pure thought alone and that actual testing and experimentation was not only a waste of time, would actually lead you astray.
He was also a thorough-going mystic, with the intolerance to differences of opinion that implies with the successful and prominent.
But its the removal of the practical testing of hypothesis that killed science for around a thousand years and the lasting legacy of Ptolemy. He was damn smart, but we'd have had several more just as smart in a thousand years.
So the answer to your query could well be: they didn't because that would be doing experimentation and therefore they didn't look.
Besides the myth that Columbus discovered the round Earth, there is also the myth that Copernicus or Galileo discovered the moving Earth. Some Greeks said that the Earth went around the Sun, and Copernicus and Galileo did not add any significant evidence.
Magellan could have simply floated around the ocean in a circle, losing track of the days, and erroneously concluded the earth was spherical. A picture is better proof--unless you're using a fisheye lense.
So give the credit where credit is due, to Eratosthenes...
But then we'd have to give blame where blame is due: to the Christians, for working so dilligently to suppress, marginalize and ignore all knowledge that came from pagan sources, and keep their part of the world in the dark for as long as they could.
The first person to scale a tall mountain near a plain or sea would have a clear impression of the curvature of the Earth. One doing so on an isolated island would conclude that the Earth was spherical rather than merely cylindrical (which Eratosthenes' first experiment could not tell). To be sure, Eratosthenes also invented a way of measuring longitude as you say, but as I understand it, it wasn't very accurate at all.
As for Columbus, there were allegedly Bristol-based Grand Banks fishermen amongst his crew, though as I recall the evidence is inconclusive. (That is, such fishermen definitely existed, but it's not clear whether they sailed with Columbus.) These people all knew America was there - Columbus was merely hoping to sail around it.
PS. The 2008 risk crisis does give a delightful piquancy to the line about "certain fashionable theories" about the shape of the world in "The Scarlet Perpetual Assurance".
I think Columbus accepted Poseidonius estimate of a world of @ 18,000 miles in circumference. Poseidonius supposedly used the star Canopus, but his work is only known from secondary sources. Columbus also studied a map by Toscanelli, perhaps influenced by Poseidonius, which showed the distance across the Atlantic to be some 3000 miles. This distance calculation was rejected by various knowledgable people, which slowed Columbus down considerably. But, having sailed, Columbus expected to reach India at about where he found the New World.
This is from reading Isaac Asimov's Biographical Encyclopedia of Science and Technology.
#25: Copernicus (1473 â 1543) was, like his Greek predecessors a purely geometric astronomer. His system was heliocentric, but it had no account of the dynamic relationship of the Sun and the planets. Galileo(1564 â 1642), was the pioneer of telescopic observational astronomy. But, while he championed Copernicus' system, and believed that his observations, such as the discovery of Jupiter's moons, proved helioocentrism, he did not create dynamic astronomy.
That story briefly, is of Tycho Brahe (1546 â 1601), an old fashioned non-telescopic astronomer whose observations were of unprecedented accuracy, and Johannes Kepler (1571 â 1630), a mathematician who reduced Brahe's observations and derived his three laws of planetary motion from them. On the basis of Kepler's work, Issac Newton (1643 â 1727) was able to prove that the laws of gravity that he had derived from terrestrial observations also applied to heavenly bodies, and created a physics based astronomy.
Note here that Copernicus died before any of the others were born, that Brahe, Galileo, and Kepler were roughly contemporaries, and that Newton was born after all of the others had died. It was a multi-generational effort.
#25, in the immortal phrase of the physicist Wolfgang Pauli (1900-1958) you are "not even wrong", just prejudiced and ignorant of history.
Since Eratosthenes was Greek, it would be better to call the unit of length a stadion, wouldn't it?
@ Wow, actually if the sun were close enough to produce Eratosthenes' results, the change the angle of the sun's rays w.r.t the surface of the earth would only be greater close to the equator, then it would flatten out asymptotically approaching 90 degrees, while with a round earth and far away sun it reaches 90 degrees like a sin function. The cooling due to the changing distance to the sun would be much greater, though.
Not that it matters, since I'm not saying the earth is flat and the sun is far away just wondering how Eratosthenes knew that, at the time :P
I don't think he knew about the 24 hour nights in the arctic circle, but what you said about the positions of the moon and sun and the moon phases makes perfect sense. It requires the sun's rays to be parallel and it was known during Eratosthenes' time, so thanks! Also, what everyone else said about the ancients knowing the earth was round and Eratosthenes just being interested in its diameter answers it too.
The one who wrote the Book of Genesis..
The diagram illustrating the phases of the moon seems to have put it in a polar orbit to make America the centre of the diagram!
"...while with a round earth and far away sun it reaches 90 degrees like a sin function. The cooling due to the changing distance to the sun would be much greater, though."
Aye, that's what I meant, even if it was unclear.
"just wondering how Eratosthenes knew that, at the time"
He didn't *know*, since you'd have to be a lot taller than a human to *know* know that, but he did know that the simplest explanation of the angular difference was a sphere and that if you went east/west you didn't get colder like you did going north/south which would be the case for a cylindrical or flat earth.
As said before, the actual shape of the earth's shadow in eclipse is also not correct for a disc-world and that too gives a maximum size for the earth which would be visible in the different morn/eve shadows on a sundial.
The motion of the sun also precludes without multiplying entities a flat earth: as the sun goes down, it gets closer to the earth and so you'd get hotter going east/west.
Terry Pratchett's Discworld gets this bit much more correct than any flat-earth system here: the rim is hot and the hub cold.
I've heard the discovery of the sphericity of the Earth in the West attributed to Anaximander of Miletus but according to Wikipedia it was actually Anaximander who postulated a cylindrical form.
I believe that was more a theory, I don't know whether a measurement of that was made by Anaximander (who, IIRC, also posited the theory that life started at the margins of the water and developed from the mud at those places: interestingly, this may be why the Christian Bible has God making humans out of Mud, especially when everything else was just "made to exist", and also that matter was made of tiny indivisible pieces and that solidity was an illusion of our senses).
Interesting post - thanks. Is this right, though?
If you follow the Sun's path through the daytime sky, and you live in the Northern hemisphere, you'll find that it rises in the eastern part of the sky, rises up to its apex in the south, and then lowers and sets in the west. And it does this every day of the year.
I mean, if you live north of the equator but south of the tropic of cancer, isn't the sun going to appear to your north at midday for some part of the year? Or am I fundamentally misunderstanding something (entirely possible)?
These posts are a lot of fun to read. Many knew for ages that the Earth was more or less a sphere, and roughly how big it was, and that the world had two continental groups not one, and roughly where they were and how far apart, and had even gone back and forth and even PUBLISHED all this.
It is debatable about the Bible; all the stories in it are either from the Sumerians, Israeli history and politics, or Christian history and politics. Whether divinely inspired or quite otherwise, it's principles work well in real life and are found to a similar degree and explained in a similar way in all large-population civilizations, which otherwise would have neither large populations nor civilization, as ours may soon lack, if those truths are not soon more observed.
Columbus was a genius though regardless of which parts of all this he understood or was willingly to admit in public, for he permanently united the earth's cultures and biospheres, even if neither has had enough time to adapt well to that change.
As that change is the basis for the social and physical technology responsible for the World we live in, and all future Earths unless we complete our efforts to complete racial suicide, these topics and other related issues in the original article as well as in the comments are of astonishing importance to all, as well as of great interest to very many.
Thank you all.
Roman numismatic iconography is abundant in examples of the Earth as a globe, usually being held by the emperor. I don't think there was ever a doubt among them that the Earth was indeed round.
Here is a link to one such coin:
Isaiah 40:22 "He sits enthrowned above the circle of the earth..." Isaiah lived 740-681 BC. I think the Bible's Old Testament statement about the earth as a sphere predates everyone else.
George, AFAIK the "circle" reference is not just an apparent (from English translation there) a reference to a flat disk - which is what "circle" means, not a sphere - but supported by other descriptions. However, there is a reference to the Earth "hanging on nothing.":
New International Version (Â©1984)
He spreads out the northern [skies] over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.
Sounds insightful, but doesn't give us much insight: those with real access to the scope of an infinite mind could get a hold of plenty to prove they were privy to insights not available to the rest of humanity at the time.
As for "pi = 3" The actual builders of the time would have known it was around 3-1/7, so maybe the writer meant the inner molten puddle?
Another myth: Magellan circumnavigated the globe. A bit tricky seeing as he was killed by angry natives in the Phillipines. His second in command, Juan Sebastian Elcano, completed the mission and so was the first to circumnavigate the globe. Yet who ever heard of Elcano, whilst Magellan is a household name...? Funny business, history.
"As for "pi = 3" The actual builders of the time would have known it was around 3-1/7, so maybe the writer meant the inner molten puddle?"
Or that was taken from a much earlier text of a different religion.
Like most of the Bible, in fact.
Didn't Columbus name the West Indies? If so, isn't the name itself a pretty strong indication that he didn't think he was to the east of India?
Columbus was sure of reaching land sailing West fromout Sevilla, Spain 3rd of August 1492. He had a map, bought from a sailor in Lisboa indicating land, islands far West. His assumption was it was the eastern part of Asia (thinking Eurasia was bigger and the globe smaller). Colon (in Spanish) was born in Genua, Italy. He convinced the Catholic Kings of Spain to support him. After completing the "Reconquista" of Spain on the Arabs (2nd of Jan. 1492), no longer spending on war they had a budget for Columbus trip. So he could organize his expedition with 3 ships. Columbus found the Bahamas on the 12th of october, and Cuba 16 days later. Colon made more trips with troops to Colonize the Americas for Spain. The Pope divided the new world in a Portugese part (roughly Brasil) and a Spanisch part west of it. Until He died (1506 at 55 years of age)Columbus believed he found another way to reach Asia.
Regarding Columbus and Magellan, you may want to consider that there existed in 1519, in the library of the rulers of Venice, a map known as the Piri Reis (Piri Reis was an Arabian sea captain) which depicts the coastlines of South America and the Caribbean Sea with fair accuracy. South American animals and birds are also accurately depicted. See Aalt's post of 9/28/11, 8:45 pm.
Most importantly, the map depicts a strait between South America and Patagonia- decades before Magellan sailed through it The authenticity of this map and its date are agreed upon by historians. Gavin Menzies postulates that both Columbus and Magellan had seen the Piri Reis map.
So Columbus may have known full well the existence of the Americas, but wanted to keep his knowledge secret in order to be able to claim large tracts of land by right of discovery.
That map had Greece covering about 1/6 of the globe, mind.
IIR the right one C.
Either way, Columbus proved it by actually sailing and finding other lands to the west. Columbus is my many times great grandfather. There's no need to put him down for what he did accomplish.
Nope, Columbus proved he was wrong and that the earth was, in actual fact, bigger than he thought it was.
They already knew the world was round. And his expedition wasn't to prove it. It was because Chris "The Doffus" Columbus thought the earth was much smaller therefore the distance to India was doable.
He was wrong.
If it weren't for the fact of another large landmass existing there, he and his crew would have died ignominious deaths.
But now I have a question for you Terry.
Why is it so important that Columbus be a visionary?
dear the ship went in the wrong direction with Colombus, he thought America was India, then he named the indigenous people Indians lol, the first to discover Earth was round, well to know him just watch this, he is a Muslim, u can be sure if you watch what Muslims invented during Golden Ages>>what was called the Dark Ages in Europe when everything was going down there, another civilization full of science was emerging and growing, even from Spain to China>>world expo in England, Los Angels, Dubai,... tells about this>> here<>>
but the best video is here dear!>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXuSNdlJOCw
u can see that these are only illuminating inventions, none of them was done by wicked science or intelligence as a wish to have power or to control, it was all due to the blessed wisdom dear!
New information, lol, the oldest graves in America have Arabic writing on them, they are the most ancient graves in America, of course Muslims like Ibn Batuta loved to travel the world, traveling and exploring and meditating are pillars of faith, so even the name America has an Arabic origin, its etymology comes from the Arabic word "AMRICA" or "AMRIKA" which means "the land which is far and uninhabited". many countries have contentious arguments about the etymology of their names, like Britain, 1-from the brith, blue or azure with which Celts tainted their bodies, 2-from the Roman word Brittanni.....
Interesting that no one quoted Ecclesiastes 1:5-7 where Solomon (born 1010 years BC), who was given wisdom above all men, said:
"5 The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.
6 The wind blows to the south, and turns to the north;
round and round it goes, ever returning on its course.
7 All streams flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full.
To the place the streams come from, there they return again.
Sounds like a round earth to me!
I never knew that wowwww!!!!
OK, why the hell are these old threads being necro'd?
PS Richard, does it sound to you like the earth is at the center?
It was Nicholas Compernik.The Polish.
Didn't, technically, Aristotle state that the earth was round first. He had some of the same proof that you did, including how eclipses happen with a rounded curve and that when you travel northward or southward, the stars will gradually become in a different position and "new" stars will be seen. This gives him fact in his theorem, that, even though it wasn't believed, was correct
It's much more simple that the explanation given here.
First, anone living by the sea, as most people always have, can look at the horizon and see the curvature of the earth.
Next when a ship sails away from shore, the hull disappears first and the masts and superstructure last. Approaching, it is the reverse. This can only be accounted for by ball-shaped world. Very few people believed the earth was flat.
oh wow<but i hope they explain it very well< actually I'm confused
Before Science ever visually confirmed that Earth is ROUND,
God in the Bible had stated that Earth is ROUND Already
Isaiah 40:22 (NIV)
22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth
Then pull out an Apollo 11 picture of the earth. From any point above the earth, you would see it as a circle. Any reference made is correct with the facts, as with the other scriptures cited by the other responders.
And the Hebrew word for "circle" is also used in reference to "spheres".
Job 27 VS 7 - 10
""He strethes out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing..."He binds up the water in His thik louds, Yet the clouds are broken under it." ...."He overs the face of His throne, and spreads His cloud over it."....."He drew a ircular horizon on the face of the waters, At the boundary of light and darkness."
Job 27 VS 7-10
"He streches out the north over empty space; He hands the earth on nothing"....He binds up the water in His thick clouds, Yet the clouds are broken under it.,"....."He covers the face of His throne and spreads His cloud over it."....."He drew a circular horizon on the face of the waters, At the boundary of light and darkness."
Spherical isn't round.
Many other problems with that.
But you're not ready to learn.
I am sorry but isn't Francis Drake (1597) who first discovered that the Earth is round (spherical). I just confused. -.-
"Interesting that no one quoted Ecclesiastes 1:5-7 where Solomon (born 1010 years BC), who was given wisdom above all men, said:
“5 The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.
6 The wind blows to the south, and turns to the north;
round and round it goes, ever returning on its course.
7 All streams flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full.
To the place the streams come from, there they return again.
Sounds like a round earth to me!"
Excellent verse Richard. I was just at my desk reading Ecclesiastes and came across this verse. God has revealed all these things to us, but men will supress the truth by their unrighteousness and sin. They can not believe the bible, because they WILL NOT believe the bible. The bible will shatter their false assurance that there is no Judgement day. But there will be.....
"but men will supress the truth by their unrighteousness and sin."
Since science knew from pre-400AD and that it were the CLERGY who supressed the truth, you're saying that the religious people were the unrighteous and sinful.
"They can not believe the bible, because they WILL NOT believe the bible"
And you can not believe The Lord Of The Rings because you WILL NOT believe The Lord Of The rings.
o que o cosmo
Isaiah 40:21 says," It is He that sits above the circle of the earth". My good people read your bibles and know that it is God who gives wisdom and knowlage.
It also says the four corners of the earth.
My god, people, you don't ever seem to read the bible, just find quotes someone else took out of it.
My God is right and your wisdom is shallow. The phrase 4 corners means south east west north 4 corners. But you are
wise and us people are just silly believers.
Your god is your imagination, nothing more.
Since this is still being argued, after all this time, here is a take-down I found of the Isaiah argument, using the original Hebrew as it's source:
What is this "circle"? Out of the 15 bible translations given here: http://bible.cc/isaiah/40-22.htm 14 have "circle", one has "disk" and only one (the Douay-Rheims) translates the word as "globe". We'll get to that later.
Ok... let's go back in time! The Greek version (Septuaginta) translates into:
ὁ κατέχων τὸν γῦρον τῆς γῆς (O katekhoon ton gyron tes ges)
The Latin version (Vulgata) translates it as:
qui sedet super gyrum terrae
The same word gyrum / gyros. What exactly does it mean? "a circle, circular course, round, ring" ( http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0… )
Still back in time!! The original hebrew:
הַיֹּשֵׁב עַל-חוּג הָאָרֶץ ( Hi shev al-hug ha-aretz )
The real word is "hug", that is, a tool used to measure, somehow like a carpenters' compass.
The only online dictionary for biblical hebrew I can find at the moment is here: http://books.google.it/books?id=MwstAAAAYAAJ you'll have to go to page 46, and see that hug is translated as "circle, arch, reel"
Do you see a sphere anywhere?
So, of all these "bibles" the only that can be somehow be read as "sphere" is the Douay-Rheims (EDIT: who actually says "globe").
Let's analyze how authoritative is it: the Douay-Rheims translation ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douay%E2%80%93Rheims_Bible ) is a 16th century catholic translation that translated from Latin, not from the original Hebrew. And as we have seen, the latin text has gyrum, which in no way can be rendered as anything spherical.
I'm afraid that this "globe" is quite a mistake on the translators' part (or at least, they were influenced by the contemporary mindframe when using that word)
Ryan, the globe of the earth is easily known by any, and I mean ANY, seafaring race.
It wasn't necessary to have a god tell us that, and finding something that, if you squint at it hard enough and bend over backwards to interpret it "correctly", is nowhere near proof of the existence of a sky fairy.
And the Dead Sea Scrolls changed quite a few of the then-current understanding of several passages in the bible as recorded in modern (English) translations like KJV.
If it had been a divinely inspired translation, that wouldn't have happened.
The bible still has problems with Bats being mammals not birds, as anything creating both critters would have known, but stone-age taxonomists may not have been aware of.
Oh come on Wow, let's cut God some slack. He obviously believed that a circle IS the same thing as what we call a sphere. He's just not too good at the mathematics of circles is all, what with the whole pi=3 thing and all. :)
And maybe he *meant* to make bats out of the same bits as birds, but he was in a rush and, well, we all make mistakes... he's only human...
I guess the real moral of the Bible is then that we should take it easy on math and science students. This stuff is so hard that even an omnipotent deity can't seem to grasp it!!!
@Wow, I think Ryan is arguing against someone else's comment that God is all wise and has already told us the world was a sphere in the Bible. He's pointing out that the Bible doesn't acknowledge the Earth as being a sphere as suggested earlier by others but, at best, a disk.
I don't think he support the idea of the Earth being flat.
well the quran said the earth was round many years before that
The Quran mentions the actual shape of the earth in the following verse: "And we have made the earth egg shaped". The Holy Quran, Chapter 79, Verse 30
Marc, I think so too.
But I wanted to make the point much more strongly than Ryan wanted to.
The god of the christian bible doesn't exist. Full stop.
Does not mean that this proves there is no god, only that the one as described in that book is a fiction.
Wow, I am saddened by your view on God of the bible.
I pray that you too shall one day experience His presence and find the true source of life and of all wisdom. After all someone had to make all of this for us to discover. And we have only discovered the minutest pieces of it to date. But yet we tend to think we know it all.......That we can see it all so clearly.... But one day we will see it all for what it really is, In all its glory. And then we will know the truth.
The dude exists the same way as Gandalf or Mr Spock does.
That there may still be some "god" around isn't what that means, though.
Just that the god as written down in the bible as it proclaims it DOES NOT EXIST.
Just like the Kim Jung Il that the state media portrayed DOES NOT EXIST.
And for much the same reason: they are stories, not accounts.
" After all someone had to make all of this for us to discover."
And if it's because something needs a creator to exist, then what created him? If he didn't need one, then this place didn't need one.
This really is godbotherer 101. Hell, it's pre-schooler introductory godbotherer.
Please try harder.
"well the quran said the earth was round many years before that"
And when it comes to strange revelation of truth science is only just getting to grips with, how come nobody ever bothers to notice that the Hindu faith has something completely nailed:
The Brahma year.
It's about 4.6 billion earth years.
Which is about one brahma year that the earth existed.
About one brahma year before that the sun started to collapse.
Another one brahma year before that time began.
(PS another point: if time began at the big bang, then the query "what happened before the big bang" is nonsensical for the same reason as asking "Before you started the car running, where was the car running?")
Grr. Milky Way as it is now. Not sun.
for evidence of a ~10billion year collapse timeframe.
Its true that the earth is spherical and not flat.
@Wow I find it difficult to believe that the earth is round..the reason why I say so is because NO ONE ever proven live standing on the edge of the earth to see the darkenness and brightness at the same time from the reflection of the sun. Take a torch and a ball in the dark room you will find a line on that ball (left dark and right bright). The fact here is if you can stand on the middle of that line you'll be able to see the dark side and the bright side at the same time so in this regard NO ONE EVER stood on the middle of this earth to prove the earth being round. Can you clarify that for me please.
"@Wow I find it difficult to believe that the earth is round.."
Not my problem, it's yours.
Do you live near high cliffs or a lighthouse? Can you get a trip on a boat to, say, 10 miles offshore?
If so, you can prove yourself that the earth is round.
Sail three miles away and the BOTTOM of the cliff will disappear and as you travel out, more and more of the BOTTOM END of the cliff will disappear.
And since the earth is (very nearly) spherical, everywhere you stand is the "middle". This is why out at sea and with no sight of land (again proving the earth is round) the horizon is equidistant.
That three mile distance is also why you can't DISCERN the light from the dark side.
Get up high and you could, just like you can see that effect on the moon, by virtue of being 1/4 million miles away from standing on the surface.
The earth and moon are both a lot bigger than a ball you can hold...
Earth is not round Why? in summer days long and in winter days short because earth in not round earth is like egg shape that is why in summar days long and in winter days short for mor information link me at my website
No, Farrukh, lengths of summer and winter days vary because of the tilt in the Earth's axis.
Traveling towards or away from any high structure across any reasonable distance provides some clue that the earth is round. A image over a flat surface would grow or shrink while maintaining its basic structural outline. Instead it manifests from the peak expanding to the base and vice versa. A flat earth is the invention forged by clucks unwilling to step outside the safety of their communities. This should not be an interpitation of the beliefs of society in general for the times.
you know you don't have to debate whose the really first known that earth is circle don't you read in isaiah 40:21-22 says 'It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in" therefore its already stated there that Isaiah is the one that revealed that earth is circle; and that's what are you looking for Phillip thejane? before somebody would search that earth is round Isaiah already said it...and that was revealed also to him by God.
Round. Like a circle. Not spherical like a ball.
Apparently you don't know what the words mean.
There was a man about 600 years before Eratosthenes that wrote: It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers: This was written by the prophet Isaiah in the Holy Bible written about 800 BC. Isaiah 40:22
The entire myth of Columbus "standing up to" Ferdinand and Isabella was invented by American author Washington Irving ("Rip van Winkle," "Legend of Sleepy Hollow," etc.) in the 19th century. As US ambassador to Spain, Irving wrote a great deal about Spain, including a biography of Columbus, in which he included an entirely fictional conversation between Columbus and the two Spanish monarchs.
And your dinner plate is a circle.
If isiah had been thought to meant sphere, then why did every other interpreter think it was a flat circle he meant? Did that asshole God not think it worthwhile correcting anyone when visiting His Hole Presence (which today is supposed not to happen at the risk of being charged for kiddie fiddling...) upon them and dictating The True And Correct Word Of The Almighty (tm)?
Admiral 'Zheng He' discovered America before Columbus. Thomas Edison did not invent the light bulb. These are USA-centric myths and simply untrue.
The bible indicates that the earth is a circle and flat like the 'seal' on an old scroll.
Some thought that the sun was a flat disc and the moon was a flat disc, and presumably then thought that the earth was a flat disc too.
The bible has conflicting ideas about the earth.
'hangs on nothing' in Job but supported on pillars in revelation.
It also states on several occasions that the earth is in a 'fixed' position.
We now know that the earth moves through space.
the 7.2 degrees difference of the shadows in egypt vs greece, at noon, only gives a hint of earth having a curve. still a long way from concluding earth being round. how quickly guess work in mathematics and measurement can deceive us! take an unbiased look at Orlando Ferguson's flat and stationary earth. this would make a long debate, but i am interested in enlightenment. peace
"how quickly guess work in mathematics and measurement can deceive us!"
You're talking about your "mathematical" conclusion that it's "still a long way from concluding earth being round", right?
Mayans knew that the earth was round from the shadow on the moon by the earth at a lunar eclipse. The greeks already knew that the earth was round. The 7.2 degree difference was how they measured the size of the earth, not how they proved it was spherical.
Try some enlightenment.
"The greeks already knew that the earth was round. " yeah like a dinner plate. Not that I completely disagree with your questioning of the biblical references just thought it was funny.
Dara The book about zheng he you are referencing also attributes the new port town to him and also the Bahamas sea rock is supposed to be a slip way for his ships...
Tower not town
manivasagar is the correct one 1500AD.. i studied the book from tamil virtual academy, the book name is thiruvasagam... he explained the earth, the universe and universe of the universe that every things are sphere shape....
wow not the answer I was looking for, stick to the main subject!
GOPAL, only when the BIBLE says something that could be re-interpreted as being something actually true is it taken as
a) what the bible *meant*
b) "proof" that the bible and only the bible is real
your religion is, by those touting the "amazing scientific truths in our holy text" (i.e. xtian fundies) a myth and completely bogus, even if it makes as good, or better, "predictions" than their bible, because they will, if needs be, work out the LEAST correct interpretation of the words of YOUR holy text and then use this to "prove" your religion is a myth.
"“The greeks already knew that the earth was round. ” yeah like a dinner plate."
If it were round like a dinner plate, then ships disappearing would get smaller, not disappear from the hull down, moron.
i thought nicolaus copernicus found that the earth wasn't round..
@wow so I am a moron for taking your comment IN context and poking a little fun at it. I am not sure how quoting you makes me a moron. You are a very silly small man who enjoys playing keyboard commando attacking people to somehow build themselves up. Which I guess is fine if that is what you need to do to make yourself feel better. But I am sure you are a astronaut navy seal electrical engineer senator who is married to a Super model like all other keyboard commandos online.Now that I have overreacted to a simple comment online I will move on with what little dignity I have left after sinking to your level. Kisses
"@wow so I am a moron for taking your comment IN context and poking a little fun at it."
Ah, so where did I claim that you were a moron for poking a little fun at it, Bob (or should I call you Kate?)?
Ah, that's right: I didn't.
My research on the subject confirms what other in the post have said. According to Stephen Hawking's A Brief History in Time, Aristotle (before Eratosthenes) wrote in the book "On The Heavens", that the Earth is a sphere according to several lines of evidence. Aristotle also provided a calculation for Earth's circumference. Though, this doesn't mean Aristotle was the first to make these observations.
Most people believed the earth was flat until the Apollo astronauts proved otherwise by extraterrestrial photography.
Maybe in your circle of people, Declan.
For literally thousands of years, people have known that the earth is round. I'm not sure why you think it was the Apollo astronauts who proved otherwise. Even if it were the space program that provided the proof, why would it have to have waited for Apollo? Apollo was the program that resulted in the lunar landings. There were many launches into low earth orbit prior to Apollo. Any of those would have confirmed that the earth was round; it's pretty tough to orbit a flat object after all.
1) How water is stuck to a spherical surface !! Why water does not fall somewhere in space out of Earth ?
2) If a train is built long enough so that one end does not see the other end, then it should not need engine to make it run. It should run automatically. No?
I suspect you are not serious, but if you are:
1) Gravity. Gravity attracts everything, including the water toward the center of the earth.
2) No, of course not. Why in the world would a long train run on its own without a source of power. More precisely, an object that is at rest stays at rest unless a force acts on it. What would the force acting on your hypothetical very long train be? Further, this force must act only on the train and not on the tracks it is moving on. For instance, the rotation of the earth would not work. This does cause the train to move, but it also causes the tracks to move with it, so the train does not really run. Mabye if the train is on a downhill grade, this would be true, but for flat track, it would not.
Thank for replying! I am serious, but may be ignorant ! There are still more doubts.
Is there any possibility that we can chat, so that I can show you some images and clear my doubts further?
Christians knew the earth was round since around 700BC. This is illustrated in the book of Isaiah 40:22. "It is He that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers, who stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in,..."
LOL.. there were no christians in 700BC... Jewes yes, christians no.
@Sinisa #129: Don't you know? Most biblical literalists don't really know anything at all about the Bible, especially not who wrote it.
Beleiver is right about the book of Isaiah. Senisa why do people try so hard to discredit the bible? I mean its the only book that all people regardless of race and gender that they agree to attack. So beleiver said christians instead of Hebrews. Does that make him/her any less right? You seemed to have put your focus on the politicaly correct termenology instead of the fact about the book of Isaiah. that like you going to the doctor and him prescribing you a cure but you taken more worry in his/her accent. lol my point is in the future please follow the topic within the thread. PS. Nor were there Jews in 700bc they were actually Hebrews. lol
Could you help me answer these questions from my flat earth wacko friend:
People that are living in the Rochester area can see the Toronto skyline, the tower and buildings on a clear day. The distance is approx.100 miles with the declination at approx.. 6,600 feet. In essence I am standing on one side of a 6,600 foot hill that is shaped like the curve of earth, can I see buildings on the other side 100 miles away? Is that possible ? What is the difference between standing on the seashore at a 6,600 declination at 100 miles and a hill that is 6,600 feet tall? In both cases I have a 6,600 hill or curve of the earth to see objects that far away. I am wrong? Is it refraction? Let me know your thoughts. I have looked into refraction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_refraction.) but that involves the sun at sunset, sunrise and atmospheric conditions. In terrestrial refraction the line of sight variance is 8% + or - , depending on conditions near the surface of the water. Let me know what you thoughts are. Also, I live in So Cal and on a clear early morning as I stand on the shore I can see the coastal lights of Catalina. And with my telescope I can see boat movements near Avalon and people playing and walking on the shoreline. It is approx. 30 miles away. The declination is approx. 600 feet. Why is it that I see the coastal lights and movements? Shouldn't the approx 600 feet of declination prevent me from seeing the lights? Is the light and image bending / refracting? Is it an optical illusion? I don't know the answer, could you help explain those questions.
@Charles Gordon #132: I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "declination" in this context. The quantity of importance is altitude -- height above sea level. The Wikipedia article on "horizon" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon) provides the relevant mathematical expressions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon#Distance_to_the_horizon) including their derivations.
Basically, the horizon distance scales with the square root of altitude. For your questions, in Imperial units, the relevant approximation is d ~ 1.22*sqrt(h), with h in feet and d in miles.
You say (I think) that Rochester is at an altitude of 6,600 feet. That gives a horizon distance of 99 miles, consistent with being able to see Toronto "on a clear day."
Your second question sounds wrong. "Standing on the shore" is inconsistent with an altitude of "600 feet." At sea level (that is, "on the shore"), your eyes are roughly six feet above ground, which leads to a horizon distance of three miles, far too short to see Catalina at all (which is 22 miles from L.A.). If you're up on Palos Verdes, or maybe the Santa Monica "Mountains" above Malibu, at 600 feet, then the horizon would be 30 miles, easily enough to see the lights of Avalon.
The Book of Job, from The Holy Bible, says the Earth is round in Job chapter 26. This book was written around the 4 century B.C.
The quran also supports the fact that the earth is round but describes the shape of the earth by concluding that the shape is much like an ostrich egg, the earth is not perfectly round. Science has proved that the north pole and south pole are much further apart than one side of the equator to another side of the equator
@Hassan #135: You've got the dimensions backwards. The Earth rotates about its axis. That rotation causes a _bulge_ at the equator, such that the equatorial diameter is larger (not smaller!) than the pole-to-pole diameter.
Of course, for believers in geocentrism (who don't believe the Earth rotates) explaining the measured equatorial bulge becomes much more difficult.
Assume you are living on the equator (to make it simple) and you take a jump while the earth rotates at 463 meters per second. What is keeping me at the same location while i am not touching the ground? I mean i should be 463 meters away from where i jumped if i stayed 1 second off the ground.
@Selcuk #137: You may wish to read a simple introduction to "conservation of momentum" (Wikipedia would be a good source). _You_ are moving at the same 463 meters per second as the Earth's surface is, in your example. When you jump, why would you think that you would suddenly, magically, lose all of that speed?
If you're riding in a car and drop your phone toward the floor, does it suddenly zoom backward at 100 km/h? No. It keeps the same forward motion (of the car relative to the ground) that it had when you were holding on to it.
Newton's 1st law. Or inertia in other words. You're spinning same as earth. Since gravity is keeping you tied to earth, same force spinning the earth is spinning you too. The force of your jump is almost zero in comparison and thus no change.
Okay, Comment 128, as a fellow believer, I beg you to recognize that there were no Christians is 700 BC <<< (BEFORE Christ) and as people get confused about how Christianity and the Church work, I would encourage you to use less thoughtless bedlam and more exacting terms when addressing something that represents our Christ.
re 135, yes, round like a pond, or round like a hubcap.
Spherical like the earth? Not so much.
PS why did that bit "get it right" according to you, but the fact that there are no pillars holding the sky up as asserted elsewhere isn't worth mentioning?
PPS It was known 600BC that the earth was spherical. The thing to ask is why the bible, which would have known this, would not have been more consistent on this fact...
The answer, of course, is the bible is no more a book of god than Homer's Odyssey or the Epic of Gilgamesh are the books of the gods of those times. The OT is a book of ancient fable by a stone age tribe, "explaining" things for the stone age people by other stone age people. The NT is a book of modern fable, based on the prophesies of the OT and trying to make out that it's all true.
It's as much fable as Brer Rabbit.
NOTE: this has BUGGER ALL to do with whether a god exists. Just whether the book is truth or fable.
I mean its the only book that all people regardless of race and gender that they agree to attack.
Nope, it's the only book where you care about it being attacked, therefore note every instance where it is done and never where it's not.
You, for example,, don't agree to attack it.
People attack the book of the CoS liberally. With no limitation on race, creed or faith.
People attack the book of JK Rowling. Again with no limitation on race, creed or faith.
You just don't care about attacks on those, so don't bother to think of them. It's much better to pretend you're being gypped by everyone and persecuted for your faith (thereby proving, somehow, that your faith is true...?).
Do you know that muslin countries knows that earth it is rounded.
In fact QURAN mention the earth its rounded before 1500 years ago
@Ibrahim #145: And the Qur'an was just passing on well-known science from 2600 years ago. Received wisdom is just that, "received." The question is whether you know from whom.
Ibrahim Canada November 8, 2014
"Do you know that muslin countries knows that earth it is rounded. In fact QURAN mention the earth its rounded before 1500 years ago"
THEY WERE HIDING IT FROM THE INFIDELS FOR 1400 YEARS UNTIL THE INFIDELS DISCOVERED IT.
In this book it says this, everyone knows that. I want to see the earth (from space), 24 hour time lapse video.
Please help me i have no concept,how earth is round or flat.
Mudassar #149: "Round" means shaped like a ball, but a really, really big ball.
Have you ever seen the ocean? Pakistan's southern coast (where Karachi is located) is on the Indian Ocean. Visit the harbor there and watch ships go out to sea.
As they get to the horizon you will see that, even as they get smaller, they also seem to drop slowly below the surface. As they follow the curve of the round Earth moving away from you, only the upper part of the ship is still visible, and eventually nothing.
The book of Isaiah was completed in the year 732 B.C.. Isaiah 40:22 says: "There is One who dwells above the CIRCLE of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers. He is stretching out the heavens like a fine gauze, and he spreads them out like a tent to dwell in."
@Shannon Mccombs #151: Yup. And the nomadic desert authors of Isaiah clearly, from that description, had a perception of a flat, circular plate. The description you quote is essentially indistinguishable from a CIRCULAR plate of potato salad with a mosquito protector (TENT) placed over it at a picnic.
What is clear from this is that the nomadic desert authors of Isaiah did not have the life experience of observing sea-going vessels disappear rapidly below a fixed horizon. Nor did they likely have the free time available to philosophers and engineers to conduct long-distance observational experiments to recognize how simultaneous shadows in different places could be different due to surface curvature.
Islam was first launched upon the world in the 7th century AD by Mohammed ibn Abdullah, aka the Prophet.
It is agreed that several ancient Greek philosophers recognised that the Earth was spheroidal a full millennium before the Hegira.
Ergo, the discovery of the Earth's form - and, indeed the plurality of worlds ,-was neither proposed nor confirmed first by Islam.
An example of the damage done to discovery by Instituted Religion, is the Supernova of 1054- now know to be the result of the dramatic birth of a Neutron star. THis event was clealry visible in daytime for 20 months, and was duly recorded in China, Istanbul, and even the Navaho Indians.
It was not however recorded in Western Christendom, many of whose inhabitants were neither blind nor dumb.
However, in a culture where novelties and unexpected change in a Divine static Heaven were considered heretical, to report a new star was non PC, and so better not mentioned!
We should not be too smug, however. In the winter of 2013-4, many thousands of Germans noted two things
1/ Fuel poverty was killing and impoverishing thousands of people in the wealthiest country in Europe, and, 2/ that renewable energy zealously pursued by the Greens to "Save the Planet" was a sacred cow:and so the Winter was not mentioned in the German Press for a couple of months for fear of raising doubts about global warming ( a hard sell in sub zero temperatures)
The result in large parts of Europe's people is that Global Warming, Climate Change, and renewable energy are now the victims of a violent backlash, and politicians who continue to promote them face annihilation at the polls.
Rulers and Zealots throught the Ages have put ideology above the interests of their subjects, ; At least in pluralisitic societies , underpinned by the innate ability of Science to correct its own mistakes and seek Truth by observation, and Experiment rather than Authority, THe hollowness of Ideologies and Dogmas can be exposed.
Science can uncover new Truths; Religion finds this very difficult, if not impossible- which is why the IS et al find it necessary to behead people in public
Put simply, Science is the only method which can convert Auguste Comte's Fourth catagory of Knowledge into the Third or even the Second. Religion cannot do this
"the nomadic desert authors of Isaiah clearly"
A man intelligent enough to work at SLAC should know that the ancient Israelites were city/town/village dwellers, *not* nomads.
@Ron #154: Quite right, and I was off-base with that characterization. By the time the OT books were being written down, they were settled in numerous villiages surrounding cities. It's not entirely clear whether that settlement occurred before or after the initial oral tradition of stories developed, but that distinction is irrelevant here. You're correct that the society depicted within Isaiah and most of the other prophets was settled.
How do you explain how it's dark in America but daylight in China if the earth is flat? Or is it a Pyramid? #knowledge
what if its more shaped like a torus? and forever manipulating shape. always flowing energy no definite shape
@RF If it was, then we would live in a world where you wouldn't actually sound like a total idiot.
@Kim - Why would you possibly consider somebody's trip around the world - something they couldn't measure precisely over the ocean - more dependable than an actual picture? Seriously.
@Michael Martin-Smith, #153:
In the winter of 2013-4, many thousands of Germans noted two things
1/ Fuel poverty was killing and impoverishing thousands of people in the wealthiest country in Europe,
Oh yes, it was pretty cold. But 'killing', 'empoverishing'?
Not so much. Lookee, there is still some welfare state left. People on welfare are usually renters, i.e. they pay monthly dues and after the winter they may receive ugly bills by their landlords. Guess what? Even this is covered by the welfare state. The Polish homeless people fleeing to Germany each winter had some really hard time. At least there are shelters...
2/ that renewable energy zealously pursued by the Greens to “Save the Planet” was a sacred cow:and so the Winter was not mentioned in the German Press for a couple of months for fear of raising doubts about global warming ( a hard sell in sub zero temperatures)
What? The press did not mention, or discuss, the winter? Sorry dude: This is not North Korea.
BTW, the Greens are not part of our government coalition.
Whoever gave you these false ideas, start to distrust them.
2/ that renewable energy zealously pursued by the Greens to “Save the Planet” was a sacred cow
Which has WHAT to do with who discovered the earth is round??
If the moon was flat there would have had to been only a full moon or dark moon, nothing in between.
-It is Pythagoras as mentioned or his student (5-600 BC) who first raised awareness of the Earth as round.
-Aristotle (3-400 BC) was the first to prove the earth was sphere-shaped by identifying that "Stars seen in Egypt are not seen in the north - and this can only happen on a curved surface".
-Not before the 18th century was the more correct ellipsoid shape identiyfied by Maupertuis.
The book of Isaiah 40:22
Sorry, don't believe a book written by someone with a squint.
It was just declared by other scientists actually it was already stated in Hindu scriptures. Read one of them here:
The sphere of the earth (or Bhúr-loka), comprehending its oceans, mountains, and rivers, extends as far as it is illuminated by the rays of the sun and moon; and to the same extent, both in diameter and circumference, the sphere of the sky (Bhuvar-loka) spreads above it (as far upwards as to the planetary sphere, or Swar-loka). The solar orb is situated a hundred thousand leagues from the earth; and that of the moon an equal distance from the sun. At the same interval above the moon occurs the orbit of all the lunar constellations. The planet Budha (Mercury) is two hundred thousand leagues above the lunar mansions. Śukra (Venus) is at the same distance from Mercury. Angáraka (Mars) is as far above Venus; and the priest of the gods (Vrihaspati, or Jupiter) as far from Mars: whilst Saturn (Sani) is two hundred and fifty thousand leagues beyond Jupiter. The sphere of the seven Rishis (Ursa Major) is a hundred thousand leagues above Saturn; and at a similar height above the seven Rishis is Dhruva (the pole-star), the pivot or axis of the whole planetary circle. Such, Maitreya, is the elevation of the three spheres (Bhúr, Bhuvar, Swar) which form the region of the consequences of works. The region of works is here (or in the land of Bhárata).
Here note down first word "sphere" :)
What is the earth was flat and the sun was round? Same result!
I find this hard to believe, for this very reason. Anyone reaching this conclusion based on parallel rays would surely have considered the notion that it was perhaps the rays that were radial and not the surface of the earth. Since they can look up and see the sun is round this would seem a logical conclusion.
I hope you aren't seriously bragging that the Hindu scripture you quoted has any real insight into scientific matters. Sure, it uses the word "sphere", but it may well have been generally recognized in India that the earth was round at the time that this scripture was written. India is on the ocean, after all, and I'm sure someone observed that the hull of a ship disappears over the horizon before the mast.
In any case, the scripture you quoted is wildly inaccurate in almost all of its particulars regarding the structure of the solar system. A stopped clock is right twice a day, you know, you it's not as if any credence should be given to the reference to the "sphere" of the earth. For instance, Ursa Major is 100,000 leagues from Saturn, while the sun is 100,000 leagues from the earth? Really? The stars comprising Ursa Major are the same distance from Saturn as the sun is from earth? Not even close, and that's just one example. Your quote is full of such whoppers.
"What is the earth was flat and the sun was round? Same result! "
Nope, very different result.
Shadows would be entirely different on the earth and the land would be shaped differently. E.g. Greenland and Alaska would add up to much more land than the rest of the continuous USA.
The setting of the sun would not happen either.
And the winter sun would be different compared to both the equatorial and current winter sun far north.
For all these reasons, your assertion would be 100% false.
The round earth is described in the Bible 292 BC
The round one, yes. The actual one that is spherical, no.
No tent has a spherical base.
Sorry, your fantasy story is just a story.
A map from the earth with the america's outlined from 4000 BC
well it is obvous that aryabhatt was the first to discover the earth is round.
My ancestor Maui was the first to prove that the world is round . Taught by Erastothenes in the library of Alexandria , Maui as a young man was put in charge of a flotilla of ships that left Cairo Egypt 232 B.C to discover the new uplifted lands colonise the unknown world and prove that the earth is round . After claiming and colonising the pacific Maui settles at Tawapata the farside of Papatuanuku (Mahia peninsula) of New Zealand . Here Maui creates the life and living of Maori the shortest day we celebrate the start of our Maori new year which is the soltice 21st of June the same day that Erastothenes measures the the circumference of the earth on their longest day in Cairo Egypt . Maui knows he is half way round the world .
In Hindu Mythology, Out of ten incarnations of Lord Vishnu, The 3rd Avatar, The Varah Avatar ( About 8000 BC) supposed to raise the Circular Earth by its Tusk. What I am going to say that, Hindus were already knew Earth is round.
Circles aren't spheres, Doc.
And they're not sitting on tusks.
And ANYONE who sets sail out of sight of land can prove to themselves that the earth is spherical, so getting the right answer isn't really much of a miracle.
So Eratosthenes discovered the earth was round?
@Bob #177: Yup, so far as we know, he was the earliest "philosopher"/"scientist"/whatever for whom we have a written record of the discovery.
It is not impossible that the Chinese, or Indus Valley civilizations, or possibly even the Zimbabweans, noticed it earlier, but we don't have any evidence.
Or indeed Malaysians. They likely figured it was round when they moved more than 5 miles from home the first time.
But it probably wasn't worth writing down.
Brus that's sick!!! ??✌?️
this didn't tell me how people found out the earth is round and please no hate on this comment I'm only 12
@hannah #181: Scroll through the article again, and look for the sentence, "It was done using nothing more than the Sun. Here’s how." It is right next to a cool multiple exposure picture showing the Sun rising, crossing the sky, and setting.
Read the rest of the article starting from that point. It describes how Eratosthenes, an ancient Greek philosopher, figured out that the Earth was a sphere, including the details of the technique he used. If you have specific questions after you have read that, feel free to post them here.
Hi.. if you read the Indian mythology you will find that they already knew 1000s of years ago that the earth was round(sphere) - even today the So called Panchang which has been printed for 1000s of years details of the solar and lunar eclipse.
Well, it was known about because it was observable quite easily if you bothered to look.
And some people put the observations into their mythologies, others didn't.
What is the indian mythology including something that you say is proof they knew the earth was round thousands of years ago supposed to mean when greeks knew thousands of years ago that the earth was round. And thousands of years ago even measured it? "The Indians were no dumber than the Greeks"?
Hannah, it isn't "hate on you" to tell you that if you'd bothered to read the topic, you would have found the answer to your question.
It's saying that you are, even at 12 years old (as you claim), that if you want to know what something says, you need to read it first.
Don't hate on me, I'm answering your question.
When i was in elementary grade 6 students,according to my study in history about the earth is round,who discovered the earth is round was named Juan sebastian del cano,he is the third expedition send by the king of spain...because the first one was unsuccesfull named ferdinand magellan,he died during the battle in mactan and he was killed by Lapu Lapu...
The earth was known to be round 3000 years ago and more. Much more. It's just we don't know if they wrote it down anywhere.
However, the observations were entirely possible and easy to do.
I school, we were asked to find out who "split the atom".
The answer they were looking for was Rutherford, but he DIDN'T split the atom, he just proposed a model where the components were separated in space.
Those of us who checked it up got the answer Hans and Strassman, who actually fissioned (split) an atom, but the teacher WOULD NOT accept the answer and gave us failing grades.
Even bringing the book with the information in it didn't sway them. They had the answer, and damn you for not accepting it.
YOU, Juan, are talking about who circumnavigated the globe.
Not who discovered the world was round.
While I was growing up, I was told "Human become from monkeys" also I remember my father saying "Roses look like bushes, but bushes don’t make roses” When you get older and you start wondering what is really the truth? You question everything, Is the earth flat or Straight? Is there God if so how hi look like? where does he lives? why people are treated like puppets ? What is the truth ?
"It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
From the Holy Bible, the Book of Isaiah Chapter 40 verse 22 between 740 and 680 BC.
Yeah. So what?
a) It's only TITLED "The Holy Bible" There's bugger all holy about it.
b) It's calling the earth flat. When it is not.
c) Therefore it can't be inspired by something that made the spherical earth.
d) Since the only claim "supporting" the existence of god is the accuracy of the bible, and it's entirely wrong, there is no god.
"While I was growing up, I was told “Human become from monkeys”"
Then they were a christian moron.
Humans are apes. Humans *evolved* from a monkey. EITHER is fairly accurate for the small number of words, but your assertion is either made up by you in false anecdote or was from a moron who was trying to get you to disbelieve anything other than their mythology.
It is not saying the earth is flat! Its saying its round! And The Bible is not the only thing Claiming the existence of GOD, Nature also points to the existence of GOD!
No, nature does not 'point' to anything.
"It is not saying the earth is flat!"
Yrs it is!
" Its saying its round! "
How many tents have a bottom that isn't flat? If the base wasn't flat, the stuff you put down would be rolling off to the side! It says it's round, like a circle. Like the flat floor of a circular tent.
"And The Bible is not the only thing "
Indeed not, there are over 6000 historically documented myths of other faiths too. And that's just the mythology department on just books.
"Claiming the existence of GOD,"
Only the OT. Not the NT, which therefore means that *as a christian*, there is no god.
"Nature also points to the existence of GOD!"
No it doesn't, any more than it proves *I* am god. After all, I MADE IT ALL. Want proof? Look outside, i MADE THAT! PROOF I'm god! Nature proves it!
Indeed, for erroneously thinking that the earth was flat sometime ago is a close approximation for the fact that science have been inaccurate. The many things we certainly believe may also be realized just one morning to find out that we believe in a false fact. Indeed this world is deceptive
"is a close approximation for the fact that science have been inaccurate. "
How on earth do you support that claim???
Indeed your authorities have been deceptive.
You are so wrong. As an unbeliever you are no authority on the Bible!
What you call your version of the bible is one of the earliest forms of science fiction writings. All the versions of the said book are contractions or expansions on similar themes. Science fiction is there to promote thought in a positive & scientific manner, not to demote the masses into a state of fear & prejudice.
It is not the world which is deceptive; it is a failure of the individual to find a real truth regarding their existence without fear or prejudice.
The only reason you believe in your god is simply because you are too frightened NOT to believe. You might miss out on something when you hit the pearly gates.
Guess what? There ARE NO pearly gates, no guest book, no rewards ! NOTHING. Just a return to reality.
"You are so wrong"
No, I'm very very right.
"As an unbeliever you are no authority on the Bible!"
Nope, I know the bible very well indeed. All you need is reading skills, and they are available to an unbeliever as much as a believer.
And being an unbeliever, I know what the bible ACTUALLY SAYS, rather than the interpretation I personally wish to give it to make it conform to my wishes and prejudices. Unlike you who read about tents and think "That's totally a sphere!" MERELY because you know the Earth is a sphere,not flat like a tent floor.
"Guess what? There ARE NO pearly gates, no guest book, no rewards ! NOTHING. Just a return to reality."
And the pursuit of meaning in that reality.
This, though, is the other option for "believing" in god: your fucked up life isn't your fault, and the terrible things being done to you are going to be why you will get a better "life" in the next one.
As long as you are obedient in this one.
Of course blaming "government" or "the left" or "the illuminati right" for the fuckup is another way to blame someone else, ANYONE else, other than yourself for the fuckup is another way to avoid taking responsibility for your actions.
See those murderers who kill people and claim that it was god's work. Therefore not their fault.
It's no different from claiming the devil made you do it.
Or your invisible friend did it when you were a child and someone asked who broke the vase.
Agreed. The event of San Bernardino brings that home !
What's frustrating about that is mainly two things
a) Daily mass murders. Doing f-all about it and allowed to do NOTHING about it but go "Oh, this is a TRAGEDY!"
b) The Fox News anchors are as guilty of causing this murder as any imam in the streets of Syria telling the suicide bombers that the west is satan's right hand and that god wants them to be killed. But HOW DARE YOU even imply that mere "rhetoric" from them could cause fwits to go shooting people! Despite those malicious evil retards being the first ones in line to insist that the rhetoric of rap music, the rhetoric of "Black Lives Matter", never mind the rhetoric of a very few moron godbotherers in the middle east is causing all these evils in society.
You can't slow the methods of murder, because it won't be 100% effective immediately, so you won't even try (do NOT mention the billion dollar home industry of gun selling). You can't stop the methods by which the idiots in your country are primed and directed to murder because the right's freedom to shout fire in a crowded theatre MUST be protected. Of course, leftie organisations like Acorn must be shut because they're abusing their freedom of speech...
The entire coutry is fucking insane. It makes the weirdest Middle East or African warlord moron look practically sane and saintlike in comparison. At least there the general population is against the idiocy.
The result of greed in an overpopulated world. The insanity is spreading rapidly throughout the rest of the world. It's easier to radicalize the youth of these 'people' and use them to stuff the rest of us. Unfortunately, the more Syria & other places get bombed, the worse it gets for the rest of us. The infiltrators are very much now around the globe, just waiting for their opportunities to 'prove' themselves.
And the war drags on ......
This is a fun subject. Am I to assume that all your data is pointing to a round earth? From where was this data finalized? The sad/happy truth is the earth is a flat circle. The Pacific Ocean is at least 3 times larger than you think. There is only one pole the north pole. The south pole does not exist even to this day. Try looking it up. Airlines fly in straight lines and use the flat earth to reach destinations in the most fuel efficient way. GPS is altered into a spherical form in Colorado. There are no satellites, its a billion dollar light show. All the communications we need are here on flat earth. We have only ever used radio transmissions/frequencies in all the time we've been here. There are no aliens just us and heaven, hell for non-believers. Our job is simple, it's to try and save you from hell. The best way to see earth is for yourself why would you ever listen to NASA a company that has unlimited funding for any lie, picture, picture of picture, fake video or hoax planet? We should not listen to an entity because of its financial backing. NASA makes so much money that they will never let you know how much has been spent on lying to you. In fact their data contradicts itself and all of any supposed space footage / pictures are altered before public release. You still have not seen the earth... HAHA this is the truth and impossible to argue. Live, Love, and have faith. Peace. The earth is circle and flat like an old record, get used to it, you will see the proof soon enough.
"This is a fun subject. Am I to assume that all your data is pointing to a round earth?"
"From where was this data finalized? "
RTFA. Or a book or blog page or whatever you like.
"The sad/happy truth is the earth is a flat circle."
Really? Where was that data finalized?
"There is only one pole the north pole. The south pole does not exist even to this day. Try looking it up"
Ah, right, you're 12 and trolling.
Mate of mine has been there. Four colleagues have been there. There are two poles, the eath is spherical and you're a twat.
Don't believe me? Go look it up.
"HAHA this is the truth and impossible to argue."
Hence you haven't tried.
"you will see the proof soon enough."
You are a sad, lonely individual.
I will sacrifice a black cockerel in Satan's honour for you.
The first 28 comments were worth reading. They were interesting, insightful, and knowledgeable posts. After that something went awry. Except for WOW and his intellectual and common sense reply's.
For the people posting time after time that your "proof" is because your religious book says so. Is it ignorance or arrogance that compelled you to reply? Ignorance because you do not read what has already been posted several times or arrogance because you think that your post will be the one that matters?
This is a science blog. The subject was on who discovered that the earth was round. Where the likes of fairy tails, re-posting of others views as being your own views, (assuming you cannot form an opinion on your own) or current politics should not be debated.
@ WOW - I appreciate your efforts in attempting to teach these "sheep" who believe they are ones that are "awake" some history and facts. And I applaud your endurance, replying to 4 years of stupidity was entertaining!
Tessy, with all due respect but people are entitled to express their opinion in any way they are pleased, even though this is not a free country , or may be because of that . . As far there is no profanity and personal assaults anyone can say whatever they want.. After all no one here comment about bagels or football, they are all within the topic .
Now, from you comment, I assume that you think the Earth is Round. So , please remind me when was the last time you saw that with your own eyes? Just please, don't go with the ships " disappearing" behind the horizon, or the Moon Eclipse, or NASA's photos ..Those are not scientific proofs of a round Earth , regardless that you may think the opposite.
Furthermore, you may be aware that many ancient cultures and civilizations such as early Egyptian, Mesopotamian , Incas and Mayas subscribed to a flat Earth cosmography, including the early Greek civilization, before the creation of the secret masonic( mostly influenced by Egyptian Masonry teachings of “Sacred Science”) , who were behind the creation of Pythagoras's secret society and theories . Pythagoras by the way , was a son of the Stoic philosopher - Mnesarchus .
Moreover up until now the traditional Chinese astronomy still (secretly) teaching that the earth is flat. Do you really BELIEVE that the ancient civilizations had less advance knowledge about the Universe than us ?...Do you really thing the pagan " secret science" and knowledge from the past is total BS? Obviously you do , which means you have long way to go , before you reach some understanding of that knowledge . The Masonic holy book is now the Bible. The “God” of the Bible is thought by most Masons to be the Great Architect of the Universe (key figure in Masonic ritual). Masonic symbolism is now centered around the “Temple of Solomon,” which once stood in Israel. There’s more. All this serves to confuse rather than enlighten Masons on the Order’s founding secret—the ancient Sacred Science, and the powerful unified history of humanity.
As ones the great George Carlin said : "It's a big ( f***n’) club.............but You Ain't In It….
Are you in the Club , Tessi? I don't think so ! .." they got you by the balls ( if you have it ) and make you believe anything they say !!!”
" And ANYONE who sets sail out of sight of land can prove to themselves that the earth is spherical, so getting the right answer isn't really much of a miracle." ...
No, you can't prove it , and it doesn't take a " miracle " to prove you wrong. Only a simple knowledge. The disappearance of a ship behind the horizon is an optical illusion , based on simple law of perspective in our common known 3 dimensional world. If the earth is globe the sail both will disappear with tilted nose down , which is never the case .. Why the ship /boat "disappears" behind the horizon is also due to high tide closer to our eyes and much higher than the faraway ship . It is that simple. The ideal experiment would be , sailing ship over the horizon of perfectly calm mirror-like water. It will prove that the ship would never disappear, just vanished, if you don't zooming into . In fact someone already did that experiment in not so distant past. Check out there are also many real videos observing the "phenomena" , or better just put your camera for an hour or two and observe the " disappearance" of a sailboat ( which would be ideal ) by yourself. Than send me a link to your video and prove me wrong .
I also come across another great statement of yours :
Someone : “While I was growing up, I was told “Human become from monkeys””
You : Then they were a christian moron. ( WOW is my response to that. Is not a Christian moron who come up with the THEORY, but I'm sure you are very well aware of that )
You ( cont.) : Humans are apes. Humans *evolved* from a monkey. EITHER is fairly accurate for the small number of words, but your assertion is either made up by you in false anecdote or was from a moron who was trying to get you to disbelieve anything other than their mythology.
Are the apes cost the "global warming " ( aka "climate change ") too ?
WOW man, you are bolshevik !
"So , please remind me when was the last time you saw that with your own eyes?"
When was the last time you saw Justin Bieber with your own eyes? Therefore he doesn't exist?
"Just please, don’t go with the ships ” disappearing” behind the horizon, or the Moon Eclipse, or NASA’s photos ..Those are not scientific proofs of a round Earth"
No, they are scientific proofs of a round Earth.
"The disappearance of a ship behind the horizon is an optical illusion"
Yes, caused by the earth being round and causing the difference between spherical coordinates that the ship travels on and the euclidian coordinates that your line of sight takes to make it appear like the ship is "dropping" below the horizon. The ship is still there, and as far as it is concerned, still traveling on a flat plane.
"Furthermore, you may be aware that many ancient cultures and civilizations such as early Egyptian, Mesopotamian , Incas and Mayas subscribed to a flat Earth cosmography"
And the Mayans at least did not. Mid-period Egyptians did not, and ancient cultures subscribing to a flat earth is not scientific proof of a flat earth.
"Do you really BELIEVE that the ancient civilizations had less advance knowledge about the Universe than us ?"
Yes. Do you really believe that they didn't????
"The “God” of the Bible is thought by most Masons to be the Great Architect of the Universe"
Who thought bats were birds....
"No, you can’t prove it "
Yes you can.
"and it doesn’t take a ” miracle ” to prove you wrong. "
Only one saying that is you. What you DO need is better evidence. And finding THAT would be a miracle. This certainly isn't it:
"Why the ship /boat “disappears” behind the horizon is also due to high tide closer to our eyes and much higher than the faraway ship ."
Because the ship/boat disappears even when the tide recedes. Not to mention the tide doesn't rise as much as a boat over that distance, so would not be able to do that. And not to mention that if there were a bulge of any size appreciable to the smallest ocean waves, the water would roll back "downhill" and remove that bulge.
"The ideal experiment would be , sailing ship over the horizon of perfectly calm mirror-like water. It will prove that the ship would never disappear, just vanished"
Then why don't you do it? It's also not perfect: do the same test on a receding tide. And also it would never vanish unless you did the test in heavy fog.
"Check out there are also many real videos observing the “phenomena”"
And they show that the ship disappears as expected on a spherical earth. Go check them out yourself.
" Is not a Christian moron who come up with the THEORY, "
a) Grammar. Learn it.
b) Only one claiming it was a christian moron who came up with the theory is you.
"Are the apes cost the “global warming ” ( aka “climate change “) too ? "
That ape sent things to hairdresser witnessing total imposition questionably.
Or, in other words
a) grammar, learn it
b) nothing to do with evolution
"Tessy, with all due respect but people are entitled to express their opinion in any way they are pleased, even though this is not a free country , or may be because of that ."
Yeah, but since you then go on to say:
"As far there is no profanity and personal assaults anyone can say whatever they want."
You really don't realise you screwed up your own earlier claim.
If you can say what you like, then that includes profanity and personal "assaults" [sic]. If you can't swear and insult, then you're not allowed to say what you want.
What YOU seem to want to be the case is that YOU get to decide what free speech is and who can do it.
That isn't free speech. At least not outside jackbooted authoritarian thugs.
Moreover up until now the traditional Chinese astronomy still (secretly) teaching that the earth is flat.
Evidence of this? As in taught in an actual university setting, not some darkened room inhabited by idiots.
Do you really BELIEVE that the ancient civilizations had less advance knowledge about the Universe than us ?
Yes, since science has advanced a great deal over the ages. Why do you think it hasn't?
Do you really thing the pagan ” secret science” and knowledge from the past is total BS?
Without a doubt: thinking otherwise marks you as a moron.
“When was the last time you saw Justin Bieber with your own eyes? Therefore, he doesn’t exist?”
WOW ! Very “scientific” question !? …Yes, I saw him back in 2010 in Montreal . Is that means he exist ?
“No, they are scientific proofs of a round Earth. Sorry.”
Sorry they are not, because they are not scientific. They are deceptive pseudo-science for retards.
“Yes. Do you really believe that (“the ancient civilizations had less advance knowledge”) they didn’t????”
Yes, I DO ! It is all depend which ancient civilizations you are referring too. It is a great mistake and ignorance for one to just dismiss them as invalid sources for truth. Unless of course , one is just trolling around.
“And the Mayans at least did not. Mid-period Egyptians did not, and ancient cultures subscribing to a flat earth is not scientific proof of a flat earth.”
WOW ! Don’t you believe that everything they teach you in school is true.
Just like the Egyptians, the Mayans did not build their great pyramids, which also were find in Bermuda, under the Atlantic ocean, Great Britain , Bosnia, China , Japan. In fact, they can be found all over the bottom of the oceans and on remote Pacific islands. What is officially known about Mayans civilization, is what they had no knowledge of the wheel, but knew that the planets revolved around the sun . Well, it doesn’t work that way. If there, any logical evidence about Mayans is that they inherited “secret knowledge” from other unknown civilizations, which existed in parallel around the flat earth at the time , long before the officially recognized human civilizations. There are no any evidences that Mayans create their civilization. In opposite, there are plenty of evidences that Mayans destroy whatever left from already existing ancient civilization which disappeared for unknown reason. If the Mayans learned anything about the Earth and the Universe was from the mysterious Olmec as well Izapan Civilizations , but even that is not curtain. Whatever is valuable as a research on the topic is already cover up.
When the Mayans settled in Yucátan peninsula , they have no clue what is going on the sky. Just like everybody else at the time, they believed the earth was flat and resemble four-sided pyramid. Some Maya from the South believed that the earth was actually the back of a huge crocodile, resting in a pool of water lilies. They believed the havens had four layers, and each layers had its own God..( hmmm, much smarter than some religions of today ) ... The Underworld had nine layers and not a very happy one. (So , Dante was missing two of the layers).
In any case according to the Mayans , the earth was considered a single continent that was fundamentally flat, and never a planetary globe.
As for Mid-period Egyptians, well again ,you either think am and idiot and insulting my intelligence trolling BS at me , or are you really brainwashed , which actually I doubt, because you are too arrogant thinking you are more knowledgeable than the gentiles by default. So, the Mid-period Egyptians were not the one who build and never knew how the Great Pyramids were build. All they knew was that whoever builds them had a great “secret knowledge” beyond their imagination. So, the Mid-period Egyptians start copying and imitating whatever was achieved within the construction of the Great Pyramids. All “tombs pyramids’ from that late period were built with completely different technology then the Great pyramids, which were source of energy and they were never build as tombs. The real ancient Egyptians “secret knowledge” was a mystery to the Egyptians you referring to.
Back to the main topic: the mainstream modern science subscribing to a ROUND earth is not scientific proof of a ROUND earth.
“Yes, caused by the earth being round and causing the difference between spherical coordinates that the ship travels on and the euclidian coordinates that your line of sight takes to make it appear like the ship is “dropping” below the horizon. The ship is still there, and as far as it is concerned, still traveling on a flat plane.”
Sorry, a ship never ever “drops” ( curve downward ) behind the horizon in perspective. Nor any skyscrapers in that matter, which can be observed in much longer distance than the commonly known and "scientifically” calculated 8, 5 miles existing curves of the Earth. So please, do not insult my intelligence. Tell this BS to your students or use it whichever “scientific “ field you working in, so you can keep your daily job.
“Who thought bats were birds….”
In verse 13, Moshe tells us about the birds, and then he lists them out. In verse 19, we see the bat is included in this list. We know that a bat is not a bird. Does this not mean that the Bible is incorrect?
NO, it means that your generic categorizations on anything are full of crap.
To the ancients, creatures such as a bat were considered birds since they categorized all flying animals as birds. If that is the category that they used, then they were correct.
“Because the ship/boat disappears even when the tide recedes. Not to mention the tide doesn’t rise as much as a boat over that distance, so would not be able to do that. And not to mention that if there were a bulge of any size appreciable to the smallest ocean waves, the water would roll back “downhill” and remove that bulge.”
No photo or video I’ve ever took or any other amateur balloon, rocket, plane or drone footage/ photos show any curve of the horizon over 20+ miles high. How a boat can “drop” behind non existing curve in far lower vanished point than that ? The Suez Canal is 26 feet below sea-level, passing through several lakes from one sea to the other, with the datum line and water’s surface running perfectly parallel over the 100 miles. Videos are available if you don't trust the round maps. The bulge exist only in NASA's CGI .
“ Then why don’t you do it? It’s also not perfect: do the same test on a receding tide. And also it would never vanish unless you did the test in heavy fog.”
You don’t need a heavy fog to see ship vanished ON HORIZON not BEHIND. It is shameful that one who consider himself knowledgeable can even claimed such a nonsense. Unless again, he is just trolling around. Geometry and trigonometry doesn’t lie. If the Earth is round, as you claim, the airplanes HAS to deep their noses all the time , otherwise , without compensation , the pilots will find themselves 60 Km higher than they expected. It’s a simple mathematics , ok ?
“And they show that the ship disappears as expected on a spherical earth. Go check them out yourself.”
Again ! They don't , unless you really, really like to believe so without any observation!
Take your time and look at this real video, if you care that is.
From experience, I know trolls don’t do that, but you may be a surprising and pleasant exception…Than again, maybe not!
Is the sailboat really “dropping” and “curve downward” behind the horizon? I don’t think so… What it is again the perspective and that hump of water in the way that blocking our line of site, so we cannot see the bottom of the sailboat.
By the way, for the record : I never said or claimed the earth is FLAT… All I am saying in here is that the Earth is NOT ROUND! Honestly, I dislike the round heads as much I dislike the flat heads simply because of their arrogance thinking they are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT and everyone else is an idiot. In my case, I decide who the moron is.
“You really don’t realise you screwed up your own earlier claim.
If you can say what you like, then that includes profanity and personal “assaults” [sic]. If you can’t swear and insult, then you’re not allowed to say what you want.
What YOU seem to want to be the case is that YOU get to decide what free speech is and who can do it.
That isn’t free speech. At least not outside jackbooted authoritarian thugs.”
I did not swear, I was quoting somebody else. However, after I come across your arrogance ,which is all over this site, I decided to use the free (not freedom of ) speech, while comment on your genius thoughts. It’s not my fault. Go back and read your comments again. Tessy , in the other hand, who really think you are smart dude become an internet “collateral damage “.
Here goes your last one :
a) Grammar. Learn it.
b) Only one claiming it was a christian moron who came up with the theory is you.
My response: Christians DO NOT Believe in Evolution…The Bolsheviks does.
That ape sent things to hairdresser witnessing total imposition questionably.
Or, in other words
a) grammar, learn it
b) nothing to do with evolution
Thank you for the advice …I will … However , English is my third out of 5 - 6 languages, which I can use, and I’m almost certain that you cannot write a word in those alphabets (plural yes ) that I’m using , so I don’t take your arrogance as an insult …Is actually have fun pissing you off !
The only problem I have after my "communication" with you is , that you really make me think canceling my Aliyah.
By the way one last thought out of curiosity: Why you did not get offended when I call you a Bolshevik ??!! Any normal person will jump all over me, if I wrongly accuse him of that!
Well…No, need your answer!
I rest my case
What YOU seem to want to be the case is that YOU get to decide what free speech is and who can do it.
That isn’t free speech. At least not outside jackbooted authoritarian thugs.”
I did not swear, I was quoting somebody else. However, after I come across your arrogance all over this site, I decided to use the free (not freedom of ) speech, while comment on your genius thoughts. It’s not my fault. Go back and read your comments again. Tessy , in the other hand who really think you are smart dude become an internet “collateral damage “.
Here goes the last one :
a) Grammar. Learn it.
b) Only one claiming it was a christian moron who came up with the theory is you.
“Are the apes cost the “global warming ” ( aka “climate change “) too ? ”
That ape sent things to hairdresser witnessing total imposition questionably.
Or, in other words
a) grammar, learn it
b) nothing to do with evolution
Sorry, English is my third out of 5 - 6 languages,which I can use, and I’m almost certain that you cannot write a word in the alphabets (plural yes ) that I’m using , so I don’t take your arrogance as an insult …Is actually have fun pissing you off !
You really make me think canceling my Aliyah.
p.s. By the way one last thought out of curiosity: Why you did not get offended when I call you a BOLSHEVIK ??!!
No, need your answer !
I rest my case
"Evidence of this? As in taught in an actual university setting, not some darkened room inhabited by idiots."
Dan , what you are asking me is if CIA, KGB( aka FSB) or Mossad training openly their agents in the Universities .
China is a "socialist" country and all ancient traditional teachings are not on the surface and not necessarily in the classrooms. However, in my nearly 5 years of being living in there I can tell you one thing - China is not what is seam on the surface . Even though, highly commercialized in most of the "special zones" , there are still "hidden places" around Yellow and Yangtze rivers, which represents in one or another way the wisdom of the traditional Chinese life, culture and knowledge. In all my long stay in there , I have met people from all walks of life, but I also have met some very special ones.... We call them " Guru" or " "spiritual master"( “Língxìng dǎoshī”) in the west. Those are people from whom one can learn a lot . They don't care about the murky "scientific" BS we are talking in here. They know, what they know and what their “Língxìng dǎoshī” knew and his “Língxìng dǎoshī” knew as so on , and so forth. This is why we call it "tradition" ..You just have to take it as is, or just leave it be...Asking questions is the main point, but agreed with the answers is completely different story. I think this is the way it should be, otherwise we will live in a flat earth without knowing that is actually in a shape of a yolk of an egg. The parody of all this is that those who keep the "secret knowledge" in the west do exactly the same thing, except that they secretly distorting and manipulating the facts and then throw all the garbage to the pigs. In fact the truth about anything we know so far about Universe and it’s connection with our spiritual , mental and physical being has never been so distorted and manipulated as in the past 100 years. So much so, that we the mortals still don't know ( or wonder) what Our PLA-NET really look alike . Moreover, we may never know, and those who think they do , without being members of the Club , they are the one living in complete dark and ignorance. And That is The Way It should Be!!!
Oh, dear, has incoherent RI antivaccine crank (and AdvoCare MLM scammer) Iliya Torbica stopped by for a visit?
So i type in "who discovered earth was round, and when?" They give about 2/3 paragraphs discouraging the competition (flat earth) then they show a propaganda picture labeled "flat earth society"... belittling the idea
1. I Didn't ask what Christopher Columbus thought..he was a idiot who after coming back still thought he visited Asia"...somehow he is credited...which is beyond me of discovering america.
2. Asked a simple question, didn't need the propaganda of no one actually thought the earth was flat... because i read the bible and yes they did.
3. Nixon was a proven CROOK, why do we believe 50 years ago we went to the moon when no nation to this day can even break the firmament barrier? More advanced industrialized China? cant do it?
4. Got Americans education level so low that they argue for round earth... thanks for making our school books pharmaceutical companies .... Darwinism...Columbus...geography...(U.S size, distance between planets, sun, everything changes every few years)
good thing I am American, Too stupid to believe real science and facts, get me a beer and turn on NASA now telling me they had it wrong for 50 years and the earth is actually pear shaped....guess 30 thousand "credible NASA photos" 50 years in space and no one noticed until Obama's scientists friend told us so....WTF AMERICA
Narad, did you just take Tdap vaccine, or you were naturally born with shrinking brain? The real scammers are those bolsheviks who sending all american jobs to their MLM paradize, which they created without consulting with your "profound" opinion. They even move the power of NY and London stock exchange to Shanghai and London stock markets just lost £31bn off its value as China turmoil sends global shares into New Year rout. Do you really know what is going on and where the crank is ? Just look behind you...
Great comment Chad .
I just like to add one extra thing " Terra Nova" ACA "Terre-Neuve" AKA "Newfoundland" and Labrador was inhabited by the Vikings , Native Thula and Beothuk people 500 years before Columbus ever set foot in San Salvador AKA The Bahamas. Leif Ericson landed in three places to the west of Labrador and Newfoundland and made contact with the Vikings in 1001 AD.
"WOW ! Very “scientific” question !?"
it's the same frigging one you used. I take it you are deriding yourself here, right?
"Sorry they are not, because they are not scientific."
Sorry, they are, because they ARE scientific.
"“Yes. Do you really believe that (“the ancient civilizations had less advance knowledge”) they didn’t????”
Yes, I DO !"
So you're a deluded fantasist then. Fair enough.
"In any case according to the Mayans , the earth was considered a single continent that was fundamentally flat, and never a planetary globe."
No, they considered it a single landmass surrounded by water and thought it was round.
But, again, even if they did think that doesn't mean they were right. After all, the Egyptians thought it was round and even thought they measured it. If it's able to say "Nuh uh, they're wrong", then the exact same problem exists when relying on the false authority fallacy of the Mayan culture. I can just say, and you have no rebuttal "Nuh, uh, they're wrong".
"Back to the main topic: the mainstream modern science subscribing to a ROUND earth is not scientific proof of a ROUND earth. "
And ancient cultures subscribing to a flat earth is not scientific proof of a flat earth. However, we have people who have seen it and it is round.
We have time zones and they PROVE the earth is round.
We have polar stations that see the months long polar night and this PROVES the earth is round.
I looked at that youtube clip. It was a terrible piece and of no sentient value whatsoever. IOW garbage. No different from any other flat earther stupidity. Show me something SCIENTIFIC.
"Sorry, English is my third out of 5 – 6 languages"
Pity you don't seem to have any capacity in ANY of them. Babelfish does better. Tell you what, go to a forum that speaks your native tongue and talk there.
"I did not swear"
I did not claim you did. However, it shows how little you can think when you think that this is somehow relevant.
"They give about 2/3 paragraphs discouraging the competition"
Flat earth is not the competition. Only conspiracists, the fatally deluded or those with absolutely no sense or knowledge on the subject would think it is.
It's just wrong.
"2. Asked a simple question, didn’t need the propaganda of no one actually thought the earth was flat… "
People didn't think the earth was flat. It's a statement of proven fact. Even idiot illia admits it by having to claim that only EARLY Egyptians didn't think it was spherical.
"3. Nixon was a proven CROOK, "
Nixon didn't say he went to the moon or is the sole claim of how the earth is spherical, so 100% nonsequitur.
"why do we believe 50 years ago we went to the moon when no nation to this day can even break the firmament barrier?"
At least 20 countries have managed it.
"4. Got Americans education level so low that they argue for FLAT earth"
Here we go
#1 pictures from "space" /nasa /shills show the earth a perfect circle no matter what view it is so by taking the accepted circumference that nasa and accepted science says of the earth which is 24901 miles around that breaks down to about 4150 parts that are in 6 mile increments . In this six miles no matter which direction (except over mountains ) a)if someone is at point a and point b is 6 miles away,an object going from point a where there first person is ,to point b, the person at point a can be 8 inches off the surface with a telescope and a boat can sail to point b and the person at point a can see the entire boat top to bottom in fact people on youtube have done the same thing across water with a distance of 73 miles and could see a lighthouse top to bottom if there was any curvature of the earth it would be absolutely impossible to see any portion of the lighthouse let alone the whole thing which means that the stretch is flat and since it can be measured this way at any six mile stretch that means the earth is absolutely flat
#2 all water no matter the size shape or depth of its container the surface is flat and level no one claims otherwise because they would be wrong and all the oceans are connected the earth is covered with 70%water proving the earth is absolutely flat .
#3 get a camera that has horizontal lines on the picture field of view get a tripod that has a level on it go to an ocean shoreline line up the line of the camera with the ocean horizon and sweep the view from side to side 180degrees or more and you will see the horizon is flat.
#4 off topic but not really there is no space travel ever there are no satellites nasa uses titanium aluminum and gold for their satellites spaceshuttles and rockets the thermosphere temperature is from 500 degrees Celsius to 2500 degrees Celsius the melting points of all three metals is under 1700 degrees Celsius meaning they would melt befor the make it through turning into liquid spray and if u believe that the thermosphere gets cold by space and thats how they dont melt then how did they measure the temperature so sorry to destroy all ur bs wait no im not
"#1 pictures from “space” /nasa /shills show the earth a perfect circle no matter what view it is"
Which is precisely what you get when taking a 2D picture of a sphere would do. If it were a flat circle, you would get an oval unless precisely perpendicular.
"#2 all water no matter the size shape or depth of its container the surface is flat and level "
Wrong. The surface is only flat to the level of observation with a small length.
"sweep the view from side to side 180degrees or more and you will see the horizon is flat."
Which is exactly what you get when you're on a sphere. If it were not a sphere, then if you weren't right in the middle, this would not hold.
"#4 off topic but not really there is no space travel ever there are no satellites "
Yes, there really is space travel and there are satellites. I've helped put instruments on them, and I work with people who test them in vacuum.
"meaning they would melt befor the make it through turning into liquid"
Nope. Boiling point of water is 100C, but putting a pan of water, meat, veg and stock into an oven at 200C doesn't cause it to evaporate and leave only solid residue.
It takes time.
And those satellites move through a much rarefied atmosphere (containing less total energy for melting solids) at a very great velocity.
Please stop being so blatantly ignorant.
Thanks from the embarrassed majority of the species.
So u have no real answers to my proofs and water is flat and level thats why its called sea level and what about looking at objects through a telescope the scope can only see what is straight in front of it bedford level experiment proves it and once metal reaches its boiling point it melts meaning the outside of the satellites would melt first then more as it got hotter internally and the structural integrity would fold under thw pressure and yhe gofast rocket launch proves we're flat plus all the new recent amature videtos prove it felix Baumgartner jump proves it the inside footage proves it when he opens the door the horizen is flat but the outside footage it shows a round earth
So far, you have shown NO proof whatsoever; mere speculation that you may be correct, rather than offering REAL evidence. In fact, if you start to look for real evidence, you will find out planet Earth IS spherical.
"So u have no real answers "
I do. Read the post I made just before that one.
"to my proofs"
You had no proofs. Only claims. Which I answered in the post I made just before that one.
"and water is flat and level thats why its called sea level"
For example, this one is no proof. Level headed doesn't mean your head is a flat horizontal line. And it's called sea level because that's the level the sea is at.
"and what about looking at objects through a telescope "
What about it? It's what you can use to prove that the ships disappear below the horizon and therefore that the earth is a sphere.
"and once metal reaches its boiling point it melts "
No it doesn't. It takes time to melt and needs enough energy to do so.
"yhe gofast rocket launch proves we’re flat"
No it doesn't.
"all the new recent amature videtos prove it "
No it doesn't. The one given by Ilia shows the hull of the ship disappearing but the sails remaining. It proves the evidence of the earth being round.
"felix Baumgartner jump proves it"
No it doesn't.
"but the outside footage it shows a round earth"
Which is missing several continents. Where are they hiding if not on the other side of the spherical earth?
“sweep the view from side to side 180degrees or more and you will see the horizon is flat.”
Sweep the view from side to side when standing in, but not in the centre of, a circle. The side you're closest to is lower down in the field of view and the side you're furthest away from is higher up.
Why isn't radar, which can travel through hundreds of miles of atmosphere between two airplanes high in the sky, unable to see hundreds of miles away from the shore to a distant ship?
Why did the English use 'over the horizon' radar during WW2 to detect German aircraft ? Simple answer; the curvature of the earth gets in the way. If it were a flat earth, there would have been no need for the above technique. The US still uses a similar method to detect any potential attack from Russia.
Where is the edge of the world if it's flat? No country sees the sun go down close to them and come up far away, or vice versa. How does the sun set for more than a day above the Arctic Circle? Why is the length of the day greater in summer and greater the further toward the pole if it's flat? How far away is the sun for it to get to below the horizon in midwinter in Alaska when at the equator it is only ~23 degrees south of vertical at that time of year? If the earth were flat, it would have to be vastly further north to south than east to west. Orders of magnitude bigger.
How far from the Ascention Islands to London is it when in the equinoxes the sun is overhead at the Ascention Islands and 51 degrees south at London? How far to Glasgow if it's at 55 degrees south? How far should it therefore be between them, and how far is it if you take a straight line between them? If the earth is flat, they should be the same figure. Are they? Why not?
In Sanskrit which is one of the oldest language of the World, Geography is called Bhu-Gol. "Bhu" means earth and "Gol" means "spherical". So, even more than 10000 years ago Indian scholars knew that the earth is round and not flat and they used to teach this subject.
So what? This fact would be easy to work out if you ever sailed out of sight of a cliff.
Just because Harry Potter contains the description of London doesn't mean there really are magicians and muggles.
Oh, and citation please. Nothing turns up in a search.
"Gol" as the name of a place? Yes.
As a word, never mind one meaning "sphere"? No.
In Sanskrit which is one of the oldest language of the World, Geography is called Bhu-Gol. “Bhu” means earth and “Gol” means “spherical”. So, even more than 10000 years ago Indian scholars knew that the earth is round and not flat and they used to teach this subject.
The fact that भूगोल exists as a word does not imply that it's 10,000 years old; this is where attested uses come into etymology.
^ And the soundness of the volk etymology itself is criticized here.
There are so many knowledgeable people who have commented, and some others, not so knowledgeable like me. Maybe that's why they're here, I know that's why I am anyway. And when I'm seeking answers, I don't like to just decide to go for the most popular answer, and consider it to be correct. Before I decide what I think the correct answer is, I like to research all opinions and theories.... if i can i try to do my own experiments, and not be so quick to draw conclusions. I've had to learn to become more comfortable with having my answer sometimes be, "I don't know." I don't think that's something anyone like to say. But I don't like being wrong either. And since I have been wrong before, I've discovered I'd rather admit I don't know something, than claim something I heard, read, or watched on tv, is true and factual, and be wrong. I find when I admit I don't actually know something for sure, I'm more open to other possibilities, and opinions that have proven helpful, and insightful, if nothing else. If I'm on a topic like this one, and someone asked me... "hey, who was the first to discover the earth is a sphere?" I would say, "I'm not sure, but I'm pretty convinced it wasn't Columbus, even though we were all taught that in school. Let's Google it! Since we all know, just because it was taught to us in school, doesn't mean it's correct. Especially with matters concerning history. After all history is just that... His-Story." So I've really enjoyed reading everyone's interpretations, and theories, and beliefs. I will still say "I don't know for sure." Lol but at least I did research it. Thanks Everyone!
#4 off topic but not really there is no space travel ever there are no satellites nasa uses titanium aluminum and gold for their satellites spaceshuttles and rockets the thermosphere temperature is from 500 degrees Celsius to 2500 degrees Celsius the melting points of all three metals is under 1700 degrees Celsius meaning they would melt befor the make it through turning into liquid spray...
Bake some bread or a cake in an oven. The air in the oven, the cake, and the metal trays on which the cake rests will all be at the same hot temperature. The difference in how your skin reacts to contact with the air, the bread, and the metal tray is due to the difference in heat conduction of those substances: the air has poor conduction, so it just feels warm. The cake is slightly better, so it feels hotter. The metal is a very good conductor, and contact with it will burn you instantly. Now consider that the thermosphere is very dilute air, with heat conduction properties even poorer than the air in your oven.
Just because science or reality isn't a popularity contest doesn't mean that unpopular MUST be true.
It's even less correct to run the opposite way.
Yes, I fully agree. Which is why I was saying popular or not, I like to consider multiple possibilities. Because of the excellent point you brought up. . . That's it's not a popularity contest. And clearly I'm not worried about anyone thinking I'm "less correct."
It's not that "someone thinks you're less correct", it's *not being less correct*.
I love it when a man is knowledgeable... especially one that knows everything like you do. It makes me hot! Excuse me for being so forward... but, would you like to go on a date with me sometime? As I'm hoping that you're single and located somewhat near me? I would really like that, and if you say no, I hope you won't mind me being flirtatious with you. I can't help it!
And thank you for saying I'm "*not less correct*" that was sweet of you. You should be my valentine wow♡♡
Uh, you think I'm a bloke, why?
And going with the less popular uneducated assertion is worse than going for the more popular uneducated assertion. The point is not to let a sophist error of going "avant garde" a la "hipster chic" to make you feel as though you're being "smarter" when you're just taking a different uneducated assertion is still just the same dogma as you assert you're so assiduously trying to avoid.
Oh so you're a woman? Even more of a turn on. How about that date, you sassy little vixen!
I've noticed lately... especially when the moon is out during the day, that the direction of the visible part of the moon, (regardless, of waxing or waning) is very inconsistent with the position of the sun. I know, at night... the visible part of the moon shines very brightly, and we're told it's the sun's rays reflecting off the moon's surface and the reason why the moon goes in phases is because of an orbital pattern where the earth's shadow slips in and out of the path of the suns rays to the moon. So, that sounds like it would mean that the whole moon would always be illuminated if the earth never obstructed the suns rays to the moon. But when the moon is out during the day, it's in the sky and so is the sun but only part of the moon is visible. It doesn't appear to be illuminated either, but that could just be because the sun is more dominant with its light. So how come the sun isn't reflecting the entire surface of the moon? When the earth is clearly not in the way. And I've also noticed that throughout the night the moon spins. Not rotates, but spins clockwise. Like a pinwheel or wind mill. And what starts out to be a "backward C" crescent, will turn into an "empty bowl" by the time the moon is about to set. I am wanting to know why? I tried looking it up but didn't find anything. And I also want to know why the moonlight is colder when you're standing in it, as opposed to being in the shade from the moonlight where it is 5 to ten degrees warmer? I would think it'd be opposite if the moon is reflecting the sun rays. Does anyone have any answers or theories they can share? I know it's off topic but I like this group (=
"And I also want to know why the moonlight is colder when you’re standing in it, as opposed to being in the shade from the moonlight where it is 5 to ten degrees warmer? I would think it’d be opposite if the moon is reflecting the sun rays."
Technically you are thinking logically. However, the moon's reflection of the sun has miniscule to zero affect on the temperature to the level of which you could detect it. Regardless, look up the terms "albedo" and "view factors". This should shed some light (pun intended). Even in space without any other sources of heat, the moon's albedo has very little effect on spacecraft orbiting earth, but the earth's albedo has a much more significant effect on the amount of heat they receive. None of this is important to a human being standing on earth (due to atmosphere and a myriad of other reasons related to your local temperature) since the moon only reflects the sunlight, and doesnt do a good job of reflecting other frequencies of light (specifically infra red .. i.e. heat).
"So how come the sun isn’t reflecting the entire surface of the moon?"
For the same reason that the bit of your house in shadow isn't.
"And what starts out to be a “backward C” crescent, will turn into an “empty bowl” by the time the moon is about to set. I am wanting to know why?"
Because the earth is spinning.
"And I also want to know why the moonlight is colder when you’re standing in it,"
And now you think I'm female. Why?
Miss Red, Wowzer could not afford a plane ticket to California.
But I could. :)
Well thank you wow for your clever answers I was way too stupid to come up with. The earth spinning doesnt mean the moon is supposed to. And the moon orbits the earth, so i dont see why you think your statement explains anything, even though your statement is not incorrect. I'm not sure where you live, but over here, the temperature is cooler in the moonlight, than it is in the shade of the moon. I used one of those really cool go-go gadget thermo laser things, and had consistent results everytime. With the difference in temperature being greater when the moon is fuller. Maybe last time you checked the temperatures in the moon light/ moon shade in your neck of the woods, you had an operator error on your gadget. Or maybe the last time you checked the temperatures, you were trying it in a rectal fashion, since that's what you're used to. It makes sense, now that I see you're a gender confused know-it-all that probably hasn't laughed, smiled, or enjoyed themselves at all in a long time. Except for the last time you made yourself smirk when you thought you "put someone in their place" with your negative influence. I haven't prayed since I was like 5 years old... right around the time I found out Santa clause was not real... but I am going to pray for you. This prayer goes out to you wow. Bless your sad, lonely, little heart. I am sending you best wishes, and hoping they tickle you enough for you to relax, or tense up enough so that keyboard you been typing with that's wedged in your ass will finally get knocked loose and you can see there's other things in life that can make you smile. But it's people like you that make me realize how fortunate I am. So I thank you dearly. In Jesus name... amen.
And Mr. Trump voter guy... get your ass out here. It's beautiful this time of year.
Miss Red, would you like to swing on a star?
Are you kidding me? I've been swinging on stars since I got pregnant and dropped out high school!!! Come join me, well take boon meams home in a jar!!
*of* high school... sorry, I just got too overzealous lol
"The earth spinning doesnt mean the moon is supposed to. "
Yes it does. Crack open a child's primer on astronomy.
"over here, the temperature is cooler in the moonlight, than it is in the shade of the moon."
No it isn't, unless you live in lala land and are imagining everything. Nah, not even then.
"you were trying it in a rectal fashion,"
Nope, I;m not the one pulling things out of my ass here. You are. I did feel I needed to say that because you don't seem really all that aware of reality.
"I haven’t prayed since I was like 5 years old"
And I never heard a thing, so you must not have prayed right. Hence your stupidity today.
Fundies are more likely to have teen pregnancies (and more abortions).
And it's odd how a cult professes abstinence as a contraceptive when their entire mythology is based on a case where absolute abstinence still resulted in pregnancy....
There you are!!! Wow... my wuv. I missed you. It kinda sucks not knowing your name, cuz I just want to shout it out! While I'm on my knees (which is most of the time since I got my tubal ligation) in the pale (chilly) moonlight... over yonder, in this wonderful world I live in, called... la la land. Is it OK if I just call you Terry? Oops wait... that could imply you are a bloke... (shhh ...a sexy one I bet!!) So how about I call you Teri? Dammit... that implies you're a dame! What ever shall I do?? Fret shan't you not my not so young apprentice... I will just call you Pat. Perfect!! I missed you Pat. My precious pitter Pat Pat double tap!
And this is that "speaking in tongues" I've heard of?
Well go and do that shite over here where it is at least not "off topic":
Yes there are morons (rappers named B.O.B) in this day and age trying to convince your kids that the earth is flat again.
This is how stupid they have become!!!!
I'm now convinced that the earth is a round flat sphere :)..
one problem with the bible quotes and deniers is the translation of ancient Hebrew(what is the ancient Hebrew word for globe?) like tryin to go back to the 1900's looking for the Russian translation for laptop. or maybe we should go back to the 1400's and look for the Latin word for for rocketship. don't discredit the religion, but maybe the translation.
I personally don't believe every word I read in any one thing.
I've watched several of the flat earth videos and some make a valid statements, however I can also see points valid for global... I can definitely see curvature from a lake or ocean.. done a lot of traveling land air sea and seen the mountain rise from the the ground( perspective )
checked flight time for planes and what I find the most debunking about flat earth is the direct travel time from Brazil to South Africa takes about 8.5 hours which in the flat world model(north pole centered) would mean the commercial aircraft would have to fly at mach 2 to make the direct flight in time. but there are many other observable things as others have said you can do to check.
If you truly believe the earth is flat, I suppose that is your right. but I cannot. flat earth would either have us believe that nasa has a time machine to propagate the round(sphere) earth lie which started thousands of years b4 nasa existed so they could get funding?(makes time machine but can't leave earth orbit)
I would like to say thank you to flat-earthers for at least prompting people to do their own research and as a round(sphere) earther invite you to do the same.. maybe in 20 yeas we can all ride the public space bus and actually see for ourselves
peace be with all
Columbus born in the 15th century and urged people that Earth is round, but it's written in the Holy Quran 1400 years ago that Earth is round:
“And the earth, moreover, hath He made egg shaped.”
The Arabic word for egg here is dahaahaa1 which means an ostrich-egg. The shape of an ostrich-egg resembles the geo-spherical shape of the earth. Thus the Qur’an correctly describes the shape of the earth, though the prevalent notion when the Qur’an was revealed was that the earth was flat.
Great hypothesis, Waseem, except that it's a load of hooey. The earth is NOT shaped like an ostrich egg; not even close. It deviates very slightly from a spherical shape. Without careful measurements using instruments that did not exist in 6th century Arabia, there is no detectable difference from spherical.
Not to mention, the earth was well known to be (nearly) spherical long before the Qur'an was written. The ancient Greeks, for example knew the earth was round, and they even came up with a fairly accurate value for its circumference.
It was widely accepted in Columbus' time (and even much earlier) that the world was round. Columbus' main argument was that the earth was smaller than what was generally believed. That's why he was the first person to set out west to get to the East Indies. Based on accepted ideas of the size of the earth, the journey would have been way too long to be manageable using 15th century technology. Columbus was actually wrong, and his critics were correct; the accepted size of the earth was accurate, and he would never have made it to the East Indies.
It deviates very slightly from a spherical shape. Without careful measurements using instruments that did not exist in 6th century Arabia, there is no detectable difference from spherical.
Yes, IIRC if you shrunk the earth down to the size of a billiard ball and then compared it to the billiard ball, Earth would be the smoother and more perfectly round of the two. Everest wouldn't even amount to a speck of pool chalk.
Indian knew earth is sphere and revolves around the sun which was mentioned in VEDAS 4000 BCE
2600 ago Pithogoras came to India and met lord Lord Buddha,Pithagoras ask so many question from Lord Buddha to verify some matters.One question is what is the shape of the Earth.Lord Buddha says it is bulbous(Round).
@264: Are you sure about that?
God first told Isaiah the earth was a Sphere. Anything else is a lie. Isaiah 40:22 refers to "the circle of the earth," or in the Italian translation, globo. The Hebrew is Khug = sphericity or roundness.
In Hindu mythology, earth shape is mentioned as 'Bhugol'
Which is in Sanskrit language. Which means 'Bhu' = Surface and Gol = Round. (Round Surface).
I don't want to criticize the work done by great researchers and scientists, but Indian's (at least our ancestors ) know these at least 2000 years before. It just that constant attacks from outsiders and their attempt to suppress these kind of knowledge resulted in less publicity of Indian mythology and Granths (Holi Books specifically 'Vedas').
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,
and its people are like grasshoppers.
He stretches out the heavens like a canopy,
and spreads them out like a tent to live in.
Proof from the Bible that the earth is round.
@Dorothy #268: Proof that the writers of the Bible thought the Earth was a flat circular disk, like the floor of a tent.
Ho Hummm .......
Lot of ancient Indain Rishis found the world are round with using their Astrological knowledge. Pythagaros came to meet Lord Buddha and ask "what is the shap of Earth" and Buddha replied the shape of earth is like paathra ( Bulbous).
first of all i think that aryabhatta was the first man to state that earth is round in shape
First person who was proved that earth is round and rounding around sun was Mikolaj Kopernik.
If earth was round it wouldn't have huge mountains jutting off it. Clearly it's not flat . Do your research it's not hollow or square either and it's most hidden secret in thousands years .
I cannot disclose it but round is laughable . Does no one know Anything anymore? Does no one observe!
Polar magnetism is not understood by mass humans or dimensions .
Earth is not round and this teaching is false and as laughable as it being flat . Hollow it is not either for all is energy .
Seek and find . I Am being too kind
"and it’s most hidden secret in thousands years"
No, the radius of the earth has been known for over 2000 years, it's shape since people first sailed out of sight of land. The only hidden secret is how you managed to survive from the stone age...
What a coincidental that a white guy discovered the Earth was round while immersed in a culture made up of dark skinned people who studied and worshiped the Sun and Moon for thousands of years prior to his birth!
I've a question please.
Is it correct to say that from 1 second past noon (12:00:01) the sun is "technically" setting?
@Michael Kelsey It doesnt matter what the writers of the bible thought. GOD said the earth was a circle shape, Gods word is always right.
Yeah, but the earth isn't a circle, therefore that could not have been god saying it.
Tommy M, have you looked at the definition of sunset?
Your question would have been answered there. Quite how you knew what it meant enough to know the question but still not yet enough to work out the answer is opaque to me.
I think that, that passage has a lot of good information for my daughters project. She definitely won't fail this project.She wanted to get full marks and I think she will with this great information. I recommend this website to all of my friends and family. I thank the person for writing this because she loves astronomy, the earth and how it was created. She loves all stuff on who discovered that the earth was a sphere.
Kind Regards, Sophie