CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Attempting to get honest answers ----- "so tell me - what are these little "stars" I see moving across the sky in an orderly fashion on a clear moonless night ?? ... someone please tell me --- still waiting" ------ and waiting
And actually everything you see is based off of 2 dimensions. The third dimension does not become involved until you move. In AutoCad everything is drawn in 2 dimensional space. It appears to be 3 dimensional, but a computer screen does not manifest the 3rd dimension.
You must have researched for that. Much of it is, apparently, correct. But sadly, nothing supports your point.
There's something known as depth perception, due to which we can see in 3D - but since that's irrelevant here, you might want to look into it yourself.
What you see of something due to a limited view doesn't dictate its properties. If your perception were limited by yet another dimension, you'd see a line for a sphere. That doesn't mean that it is linear.
You must have researched for that. Much of it is, apparently, correct. But sadly, nothing supports your point.
There's something known as depth perception, due to which we can see in 3D - but since that's irrelevant here, you might want to look into it yourself.
What you see of something due to a limited view doesn't dictate its properties. If your perception were limited by yet another dimension, you'd see a line for a sphere. That doesn't mean that it is linear.
That can, at best, only explain why those writing the Bible made the mistakes (which apparently translates to that they were idiots, for Earth being sphere-like was known to ancient Greeks).
for Earth being sphere-like was known to ancient Greeks
Pretty sure the Israelites of the bible predate Greece. The Old Testament well predates Christianity. The Greeks barely predate Christianity. Apparently you learned something today.
And if you want to get into semantics of when they were officially "Greeks", it is still problematic for your case, that the Israelites had the knowledge themselves at all.
It was first discovered by the traveller, philosopher and mathematician Pythagoras around the 7th or 8th century BCE. That's earlier than the time Old Testament was completed. But still, it isn't as bad as ignoring things, for the two hadn't come in much contact by then.
However, both are still predated by Ancient Hinduism, or the Vedic religion, which still believed that the Earth is not flat.
There are books in the OT that predate the date given. It doesn't matter if the last completed OT book came later or not. The OT books are books seperate from each other that have now been compiled into one book for convenience. "The book of Genesis". "The book of Leviticus". "The book of Malachi". "The book of Job".
What is your claim? That the Greeks came down to Israel, told the Jews the secrets, then ran back to Greece? And then they withheld said knowledge from everyone else? Hmmmm.... I've got some ocean front property in Arizona if you are in the market.
If you were in a simulation, there would never actually be a 3rd dimension, only the appearance of such. It would just be a mass of circles that quickly "switch" to fool your mind into thinking it is 3 dimensional. Now you'll have to prove that the reality that you are in is any different. Now tell us what kind of path you would take to go completely around the world.
I've said this before... If you use an attractive woman metaphor then indeed the Earth is very very pretty, but she's also flat - or at least not nearly as stacked as her peers. To be frank she doesn't really even have too great of a moon.
Of course, some people are still into that, which would explain the rise.
Indeed, I'm not really getting anywhere - however I believe it has nothing to do with "spamming"
FE = Spamming unrelated threads with your angry noob stuff won't get you anywhere. --------- answers my mam ---- answers
FEI think you're on the wrong thread, maybe wrong web site ---- oh I'm on the right website alright --- needing honest answers still from the FEers --- so tell me - what are these little "stars" I see moving across the sky in an orderly fashion on a clear moonless night ?? ... someone please tell me --- still waiting
FE = Don't need to answer these questions to prove that the earth is flat --------- um, yeah, ya kinda do
FE = volcanoes are government fabrications that doesn't and never existed --------- omG !!!!!
If the Bible said it was flat I am pretty sure you would be arguing it was. Then again, maybe it once and it was part of the many passages that have been edited out overtime.
Why would they "edit it out" when throughout most of human church history, no one knew whether it was flat or not to have "edited it". They wouldn't have known what to "edit it" to in the first place.
There are versions of the Bible preserved that are thousands and hundreds of years old. Even Columbus didn't know the Earth was round. Otherwise he would have saved himself the trouble...
First, it's about the Science Theory. Copernicus had already saying, the earth is round/spherical, before that church claim this world is flat . But, again this theory had refuted by Galileo Galilei, but Galileo Galilei even to punish by the church member because he refute the church theory . But, if the earth is flat. Then how you explain why the constellation stars always changed, around the earth . And Second, it's about HOAXERS, this world is fill with sly people, which can lie us / or even they can lie public . So, We don't need to be trust it, we must selective which wrong and which true . Government must take handle of this HOAXERS, HOAXERS always said, "I'am making oppinion not fake news, but about the making oppinion it's has a limitation, which not change the science theory, or lie the public . So, I think . The Flat Earth Theory is not effective and true . But the earth is still spherical . And then, for my third point it is about the evidence which, if the earth is flat . Then, never be night, noon, or morning . But it still night, morning, or noon . For my fourth point, it's about the people which often to read the HOAX, keep carefully . Because the false which repeated will become the true .
whether to believe information you come across or not is solely your opinion. in that aspect, if you do not believe that earth is round (as shown in the satellite images) you shouldn’t believe the existence of any
1)place you’ve heard of, but not visited.
2)person you’ve heard of but not seen him/her in person
Even if we had to say that earth is flat, it would be wrong, as we do have devices that measure the earth's curvature, not to forget that if we measure the curvature(let's assume it's the same throughout) at a point, lets's try to draw a diagram, keeping the curvature constant on every point of the diagram (or you could take average of curvatures ) on a paper you'd get a circle,a 3-d diagram, would be a sphere.
PS: by curvature here i mean the angle of curvature.
