Okay Smarty Pants, I Dare You to Show Us Why the Following Proofs for a non-Spinning Earth are Wrong

[Skwim]

In his book, 200 Proofs The Earth Is Not A Spinning Ball,

Eric Dubay presents the following arguments for a non-Rotating Earth:

1. The horizon always appears perfectly flat – except in NASA and other government pictures, which are obviously faked (as part of the global conspiracy)

2. You never have to look down to see the horizon, no matter how hard you rise. If Earth were a real globe you’d have to look down

3. If Earth really was a sphere hurtling through space, the water would be wobbling all over the place, instead of staying flat.

4. If Earth really was a globe, rivers such as the Mississipi would have to flow uphill to reach the sea – flowing uphill 11 miles in its 3,000-mile length.

5. If Earth really was flat, helicopters would be able to hover in place and wait for their destinations to come to them.

6. The railway from London to Liverpool is 180 miles long. If Earth really was a globe, it should be 5,400 feet high over Birmingham.

7. If Earth really was a globe, airline pilots would constantly have to adjust their controls so as not to fly off into space.

8. If there actually were billions of stars in the night sky (Flat Earthers think there aren’t), the entire sky would be full of light.

9. If Earth was constantly spinning, aeroplanes would never be able to reach their destinations due to the 500mph headwind.

10. If Earth really is spinning, bullets fired upwards would land hundreds of feet Westwards. They don’t.
source and more​

Take any or all of them and give them your best shot, know-it-all.


.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm going to guess the author hasn't spent much time watching the passage of the sun, the moon, or the even just planets of our solar system that are easily visible to the naked eye.
I would suggest he read into some Einstein and relativity, but I don't think his brain could handle it.

 

[Aquitaine]

He's got my vote.

 

[von bek]

I'm going to guess the author hasn't spent much time watching the passage of the sun, the moon, or the even just planets of our solar system that are easily visible to the naked eye.
I would suggest he read into some Einstein and relativity, but I don't think his brain could handle it.

Well, in order to check Einstein, he would have to visit the library. That could be dangerous, what if he fell off the flat earth on his way?

 

[Demonslayer]

He convinced me. Earth is a stationery cube.

 

[Skwim]

I'm going to guess the author hasn't spent much time watching the passage of the sun, the moon, or the even just planets of our solar system that are easily visible to the naked eye.
I would suggest he read into some Einstein and relativity, but I don't think his brain could handle it.

No, No, No, Just because you can't dispute his arguments is no reason to resort to an ad hom. But if this is your best shot, so be it.

So far then:

Dubay......... 1
Challengers 0


.​

 

[Skwim]

Well, in order to check Einstein, he would have to visit the library. That could be dangerous, what if he fell off the flat earth on his way?

He convinced me. Earth is a stationery cube.

Dubay......... 3
Challengers 0


.​

 

[von bek]

Serious question, what is the gain in people lying about the shape of the Earth? What is the reason behind the "scam?"

*ETA: Never mind. My above questions takes us away from the OP. My apologies.

 

[Demonslayer]

Imagine trying to play tennis on a round Earth? Any ball that was near the sideline would bounce way off to the left or right! Preposterous!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No, No, No, Just because you can't dispute his arguments is no reason to resort to an ad hom. But if this is your best shot, so be it.

I can easily dispute his arguments. A part of that is just by looking up.

 

[Skwim]

Serious question, what is the gain in people lying about the shape of the Earth? What is the reason behind the "scam?"

*ETA: Never mind. My above questions takes us away from the OP. My apologies.

Your "never mind" comes too late. You've already insulted Dubay, calling him a liar, instead of responding directly to any of his arguments.

Dubay......... 4
Challengers 0

​

Imagine trying to play tennis on a round Earth? Any ball that was near the sideline would bounce way off to the left or right! Preposterous!

Any argument in support of Dubay is considered a point in his favor.

Dubay......... 5
Challengers 0
​

I can easily dispute his arguments. A part of that is just by looking up.

Sorry, but only part of an argument is like only part of a equation. Gotta have it all to make it worthwhile.

Dubay......... 6
Challengers 0


.​

 

[Father Heathen]

If the earth were a spinning ball, any other spherical objects place on the ground should immediately begin to roll toward the west.

 

[Skwim]

If the earth were a spinning ball, any other spherical objects place on the ground should immediately begin to roll toward the west.

EXCELLENT point! Just excellent.

Dubay......... 7
Challengers 0


.​

 

[Shadow Wolf]

No, No, No, Just because you can't dispute his arguments is no reason to resort to an ad hom. But if this is your best shot, so be it.

So far then:

Dubay......... 1
Challengers 0


.​

And just to clarify, Aristotle proved the Earth is round just by "looking up."
So, again, I doubt this Dubay person has spent much time observing the celestial bodies, and probably isn't too familiar with Einstein.
You score sheet more properly reads
Dubay 0
Challengers 1 (as of when I scoffed at such idiocy).

 

[Skwim]

And just to clarify, Aristotle proved the Earth is round just by "looking up."

Equating yourself with Aristotle, are you. That's a lot of chutzpah, S.W.

So, again, I doubt this Dubay person has spent much time observing the celestial bodies, and probably isn't too familiar with Einstein.
You score sheet more properly reads
Dubay 0
Challengers 1 (as of when I scoffed at such idiocy).

Mere scoffing does not count as a legitimate form of counter argument.
Your dispute is duly noted and will be taken up in conference.

NOTE: Vote adjustment to include Aquitaine's "He's got my vote." post #3. Our apologies for the oversight.

Dubay......... 8
Challengers 0


.​

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Equating yourself with Aristotle, are you. That's a lot of chutzpah, S.W.

I'm not equating myself to him, rather saying I am using roughly the same methods. Much how I can disprove spontaneous generation using a similar experiment as set up by Pasteur. I wouldn't be equating myself to Pasteur, only using a similar set up.

Mere scoffing does not count as a legitimate form of counter argument.

It doesn't, but there are numerous ways to prove the Earth is round. If you're near a port, watch for incoming ships. They don't just appear on the horizon, but rather "emerge from underneath," much in the same way we see the sun rise in the morning. When we see an eclipse, the shape of the shadow we see is round. If I put a straight stick in the ground here, and have someone do the same in Egypt, the angle of the shadow cast by the stick will not be the same at the same time, but they would have to be for the Earth to be flat. Aristotle also watched the constellations to prove the Earth is round.
So, again, Dubay must not spend much time looking up. It doesn't matter what I may state as a comment about him, he is wrong.

 

[David1967]

Imagine trying to play tennis on a round Earth? Any ball that was near the sideline would bounce way off to the left or right! Preposterous!

Hah! That must be the reason I'm so bad at tennis.

 

[Skwim]

I'm not equating myself to him, rather saying I am using roughly the same methods. Much how I can disprove spontaneous generation using a similar experiment as set up by Pasteur. I would be equating myself to Pasteur, only using a similar set up.

Okay.

It doesn't, but there are numerous ways to prove the Earth is round. If you're near a port, watch for incoming ships. They don't just appear on the horizon, but rather "emerge from underneath," much in the same way we see the sun rise in the morning. When we see an eclipse, the shape of the shadow we see is round. If I put a straight stick in the ground here, and have someone do the same in Egypt, the angle of the shadow cast by the stick will not be the same at the same time, but they would have to be for the Earth to be flat. Aristotle also watched the constellations to prove the Earth is round.
So, again, Dubay must not spend much time looking up. It doesn't matter what I may state as a comment about him, he is wrong.

Nice.

Dubay......... 8
Challengers 1


.​

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

In his book, 200 Proofs The Earth Is Not A Spinning Ball,

Eric Dubay presents the following arguments for a non-Rotating Earth:

1. The horizon always appears perfectly flat – except in NASA and other government pictures, which are obviously faked (as part of the global conspiracy)

but the degree of "curveyness" is smaller than we can detect with the naked eye even under ideal conditions on the earth's surface, until we get at least 30,000 feet up. Requires a knowledge of geometry and actual measurements of the earth to determine the curvature.

2. You never have to look down to see the horizon, no matter how hard you rise. If Earth were a real globe you’d have to look down

Not quite sure what this is trying to say.

3. If Earth really was a sphere hurtling through space, the water would be wobbling all over the place, instead of staying flat.

It is; it called tides, waves, currents, etc. It only appears to be flat.

4. If Earth really was a globe, rivers such as the Mississipi would have to flow uphill to reach the sea – flowing uphill 11 miles in its 3,000-mile length.

I assume he believes gravity exists, since nothing goes flying up into the air without a push of some sort. Gravity causes the earth's surface to curve to make earth a sphere, but if you don't understand geometry, geology and geography, then it's going to be difficult to explain that rivers flow downhill in relation to the distance to the center of the earth's mass.

5. If Earth really was flat, helicopters would be able to hover in place and wait for their destinations to come to them.

You mean, was really round.

While sitting on the earth before takeoff, helicopters are moving with the same rotational velocity as the earth; they do not lose that velocity when they lift off vertically, so they will maintain their position over the same location.

6. The railway from London to Liverpool is 180 miles long. If Earth really was a globe, it should be 5,400 feet high over Birmingham.

No, it should be 5,400 feet high over London.

7. If Earth really was a globe, airline pilots would constantly have to adjust their controls so as not to fly off into space.

And yet they don't have to keep adjusting their controls so as to not fly off into space. or else all pilots are actually in on the conspiracy and therefore lie about it.

8. If there actually were billions of stars in the night sky (Flat Earthers think there aren’t), the entire sky would be full of light.

Most of them are too dim to see as our eyes are not sufficiently sensitive. many are behind the ones we can see in the plane of the Milky Way, and most are obscured by gas and dust in interstellar space.

9. If Earth was constantly spinning, aeroplanes would never be able to reach their destinations due to the 500mph headwind.

Does he really say "aeroplanes?" Really? "Oh, mater, no more buttered scones for me! I'm off to fly a bloody aeroplane!"

Variation on #5. There are no 500 mph headwinds measured, because the atmosphere tends to move along with the rotation of the earth. Not sure where he gets this figure because the rotational speed is about 1,000 mph at the equator eastward, and are not significantly slower than that at the mid-latitudes; and the winds vary slightly around that total speed of rotation.

Since jets are able to fly at at least 600 mph, they would make 100 mph against the headwind, and would make 1,100 mph with the tailwind (as his logic seems to suggest). This wind would also affect helicopters rising vertically and bullets being shot straight up. And yet we do not see this effect...because everything on the surface and in the air is moving at roughly the same speed.

10. If Earth really is spinning, bullets fired upwards would land hundreds of feet Westwards. They don’t.

Variation on #5. Bullets are co-moving with the rotation of the earth at all times.

source and more​

Take any or all of them and give them your best shot, know-it-all.


.

 

[Skwim]

..

Sorry, but a complete lack of an argument counts as a bad argument.

Dubay......... 9
Challengers 1


.​