The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free! The earth is flatin Earth Science

SilverishGoldNova

@Coveny He wasn't lying when he said it went extinct for a while. A little history lesson:  Thousands of years ago someone who was really invested into naval gazing looked out again and saw boats disappear which has now been debunked. Then someone baselessly came up with heliocentrism in the 16th century. The flat Earth theory was brought back somewhere in the 1800's-1900's. 

Coveny

So after the calculating how the max distance light travels in the flat earth model I got to thinking about the angles involve. The sun on the flat earth is 6k over the earth, and provides light to a maximum of roughly 7k away. That seemed like a pretty strong angle to me so I used an internet triangle calculator thing. (because I'm lazy) Turns out the smallest degree the sun is at is 33.69° when it "fades" away according to Flat Earthers. So the shadow cast from an object on the ground shouldn't be smaller than 33 degrees.



It's an easy experiment to verify by anyone, and easy to check the math as well, but personally I've seen MANY shadows that were less than a 33 degree angle. (45 degrees should be the same length as height)



Also I would like to reiterate at the 33 degree mark is where the sun supposedly faded and can't be seen anymore so the shadows from the sun at that point should be VERY faint as the light source should be very faint. Obviously from the picture above that's not the case, but I feel like this is an easy experiment that anyone can do to disprove the flat earth model. 

Erfisflat

@coveny , where did you get this presumed distance to the sun, and wtf does this have to with the shape of the earth?

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

@coveny , where did you get this presumed distance to the sun, and wtf does this have to with the shape of the earth?

Ok what's is the distance to the sun? The flat earther stuff I saw say it was 6,000 miles up, and 23 miles in diameter. 

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

@coveny , where did you get this presumed distance to the sun, and wtf does this have to with the shape of the earth?

Ok what's is the distance to the sun? The flat earther stuff I saw say it was 6,000 miles up, and 23 miles in diameter. 

I mean, as I said it's pretty much irrelevant. The name of the debate is not "the flat earth model that coveny read about is irrefutable", the debate is titled "the EARTH is flat". Had you proposed any evidence for a curved body of water, we might have a more relevant conversation. 

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

@coveny , where did you get this presumed distance to the sun, and wtf does this have to with the shape of the earth?

Ok what's is the distance to the sun? The flat earther stuff I saw say it was 6,000 miles up, and 23 miles in diameter. 

I mean, as I said it's pretty much irrelevant. The name of the debate is not "the flat earth model that coveny read about is irrefutable", the debate is titled "the EARTH is flat". Had you proposed any evidence for a curved body of water, we might have a more relevant conversation. 

Except for the fact that it proves the flat earth model is false. That part is pretty relevant to the whole "the earth is flat" debate don't you think? ROFL

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

@coveny , where did you get this presumed distance to the sun, and wtf does this have to with the shape of the earth?

Ok what's is the distance to the sun? The flat earther stuff I saw say it was 6,000 miles up, and 23 miles in diameter. 

I mean, as I said it's pretty much irrelevant. The name of the debate is not "the flat earth model that coveny read about is irrefutable", the debate is titled "the EARTH is flat". Had you proposed any evidence for a curved body of water, we might have a more relevant conversation. 

Except for the fact that it proves the flat earth model is false. That part is pretty relevant to the whole "the earth is flat" debate don't you think? ROFL

If you assumed the sun was 6,000 miles from the earth and you even considered refraction in your equations, it still wouldn't prove that water has ever been found in humped form. Chase those red herrings. We know that's your best argument, something completely irrelevant. Just waiting on you to call me a religious zealot again... any post now.

Erfisflat

While youre at it please explain exactly how you "calculated the max distance the light travels in the flat earth model". Show your math please @Coveny

Erfisflat

SilverishGoldNova

@Coveny 6000 miles and 23 miles? I think its around 3000-5000 and 27-32. Close enough

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

@coveny , where did you get this presumed distance to the sun, and wtf does this have to with the shape of the earth?

Ok what's is the distance to the sun? The flat earther stuff I saw say it was 6,000 miles up, and 23 miles in diameter. 

I mean, as I said it's pretty much irrelevant. The name of the debate is not "the flat earth model that coveny read about is irrefutable", the debate is titled "the EARTH is flat". Had you proposed any evidence for a curved body of water, we might have a more relevant conversation. 

Except for the fact that it proves the flat earth model is false. That part is pretty relevant to the whole "the earth is flat" debate don't you think? ROFL

If you assumed the sun was 6,000 miles from the earth and you even considered refraction in your equations, it still wouldn't prove that water has ever been found in humped form. Chase those red herrings. We know that's your best argument, something completely irrelevant. Just waiting on you to call me a religious zealot again... any post now.

I assume? Ok rather than playing word games, if it's not 6,000 miles away... how far is it? Oh that's right your "model" changes depending on what you are talking about so that you can sidestep science that proves it's wrong. Tell me what you believe if it's not 6,000 miles away... it really doesn't matter because it doesn't work, and your model fails.

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

While youre at it please explain exactly how you "calculated the max distance the light travels in the flat earth model". Show your math please

To use a phrase you flat earthers love so well I already did... 

Coveny

Erfisflat said:

I will agree this wasn't a good diagram I was lazy with it, no argument on that front. If you pester me about it enough I'll likely make a new one that's better.

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

@coveny , where did you get this presumed distance to the sun, and wtf does this have to with the shape of the earth?

Ok what's is the distance to the sun? The flat earther stuff I saw say it was 6,000 miles up, and 23 miles in diameter. 

I mean, as I said it's pretty much irrelevant. The name of the debate is not "the flat earth model that coveny read about is irrefutable", the debate is titled "the EARTH is flat". Had you proposed any evidence for a curved body of water, we might have a more relevant conversation. 

Except for the fact that it proves the flat earth model is false. That part is pretty relevant to the whole "the earth is flat" debate don't you think? ROFL

If you assumed the sun was 6,000 miles from the earth and you even considered refraction in your equations, it still wouldn't prove that water has ever been found in humped form. Chase those red herrings. We know that's your best argument, something completely irrelevant. Just waiting on you to call me a religious zealot again... any post now.

I assume? Ok rather than playing word games, if it's not 6,000 miles away... how far is it? Oh that's right your "model" changes depending on what you are talking about so that you can sidestep science that proves it's wrong. Tell me what you believe if it's not 6,000 miles away... it really doesn't matter because it doesn't work, and your model fails.

I've never claimed the distance to the sun, nor have I subscribed to any model, because once again (say it with me) this is a red herring. I claim that the earth is flat. Many axioms come into play when working out the altitude of the sun, like refraction (magic). Too many for me to worry with. There is ample enough proof to say that the earth is flat and motionless. If you want, you can work out the distance to the sun, since this seems to be your main concern, and get back to me when you finish.

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

While youre at it please explain exactly how you "calculated the max distance the light travels in the flat earth model". Show your math please

To use a phrase you flat earthers love so well I already did... 

 Except in your case it is just a lie. We can all go back and see this. I'm pretty sure you haven't a clue how to work out the max distance light travels in the flat earth model, and you're just being dishonest to try and look like you've got more sense than a boiled egg. That's right, I see you. Don't expect any more attention here. You're just wasting my time.

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

Erfisflat said:

I will agree this wasn't a good diagram I was lazy with it, no argument on that front. If you pester me about it enough I'll likely make a new one that's better.

Finally something we can agree on. You're a dunce.

Coveny

"Official" science screwing things up for everyone. ROFL

Erfisflat

Coveny said:

"Official" science screwing things up for everyone. ROFL

I mean, this is just common sense. Had these guys demonstrated that carrots or cannabis oil is more effective than parachutes, as I have done for this dichotomy, it might be a valid analogy. The main difference here is that I use the scientific method to reach a conclusion, whereas you rely solely on what you are told, claiming you are scientific without using the scientific method. I am applying skepticism and you are applying cynicism. 

Erfisflat

Due to the uncivilized conduct here, this debate is now closed. As of now, the flat earth is unrefuted. Please direct any points and counterarguments in the new debate: the earth is flat and stationary.