This page was first published on the 14th of August, 2016 and last updated on the 18th of August, 2016 by Patrick Carpen.
I was inspired to write this article after reading an article debating the roundness of the earth, and arguing that it is actually flat. Read the original article here:
We were taught since primary school that the earth is round. The earth rotates on its axis once every twenty four hours. At the same time, it revolves around the sun once every three hundred and sixty five and a quarter days.
On top of that, through the system of formal education we have been spoon-fed many scientific theories, most of which we were forced to swallow. At least, if we were passionate about high paying jobs, college degrees and respectable working conditions, we had to pass the exams.
But many of the scientific theories that were taught in school were disproved and replaced with new ones time and time again. And the new one was welcomed with only a slight shrug of the shoulder and arms open wide, and an aha moment: we finally got it right! And should I say, with victorious arms flung into the air?
And it would stay correct until a more modern, up-to-date theory disproves it, if that ever happens, and no one would so much as bat an eyelash. But isn’t this the only way forward? We’re learning all the time, aren’t we? We sure are.
The fathers of science and technology has a noble duty to pass down only what is right and true to the best of their knowledge to the future scientific generations. If they don’t, too much could go wrong. And if modern technology weren’t based on the proven scientific facts, then too many things would go wrong. We certainly would not have reached the level of advancement we are at at now. And we certainly would not have been able to go to the moon.
But did we really go to the moon?
Most of technology’s children have come to accept the idea that mankind landed on the moon pretty much as strongly as they accept that the earth is round. But several questions arise. Why was the flag that was planted on the moon “fluttering” if there was no wind or even atmosphere on the moon?
Is the Earth Really Round?
Most modern day Christians don’t doubt that the earth is round. After all, they learned that in school at an age when their minds were still very impressionable. I asked my friend Joe from the US: “what percentage of humans have actually gone out into outer space and seen the earth spinning as a globe on its axis?” His answer: an infinitely minute percentage. Could all we, like sheep, have gone astray? Could we have been led as dumbly as sheep to the slaughter?
Why Would The Leaders Want To Lie?
If the scientific leaders of the world are lying about the shape of the earth, what motive would they have to do so? Such a hoax would be utterly difficult to pull and almost impossible to maintain for any period of time. Could it be that its time is up? Some flat-earthers (people who believe the earth is flat) claim that the teaching that the earth is round is meant to lead men astray from God. They claim it is ungodly in nature. After all, when you tell people that the earth is round and that there are billions of other earths, suns and solar systems in the universe, you increase the probability of evolution in the human mind. And when you combine that with a big bang theory widely accepted in the education system, you come pretty close to wiping God and creation out of the equation.
Related: The Chicken and the Egg: Which Came First?
I can identify crap when I see it. And I am quick to brush aside fantastic explanations of everyday events; but when I first read the article on the flat earth, it caught my attention, and quite a few things jumped out at me.
Flat-Earther’s Question the Existence of Gravity
Flat-earthers questioned the integrity of the “law of gravity”. Gravity, this mysterious force exerted by the heavenly bodies to keep everything in place, and present in quantum amounts in almost everything that contains mass, could it really be real?
The theory of gravity falls apart under scrutiny. The theory of gravity asserts that the more mass an object has, the stronger its gravitational pull. The earth is much bigger than the moon, so it therefore has a far greater gravitational pull than the moon. That is why, when the astronauts went to the moon, they had to be careful not to bounce off the moon and float away into space. Jupiter would exert a stronger gravitational pull than the earth because it is bigger. Here’s a quote about gravity from a scientific website that left me thinking, and almost brainwashed:
Every object in the universe with mass attracts every other object with mass. The amount of attraction depends on the size of the masses and how far apart they are. For everyday-sized objects, this gravitational pull is vanishingly small, but the pull between a very large object, like the Earth, and another object, like you, can be easily measured. How? All you have to do is stand on a scale! Scales measure the force of attraction between you and the Earth. This force of attraction between you and the Earth (or any other planet) is called your weight.
If I stand on a scale on earth, I can verify that I weight170 lbs. But I have never had the opportunity to stand on a scale on Mars or Venus. Yet, the scientific leaders of the world claim to know what I would weigh on these planets, based on the SIZE of these planets.
Here is how the story goes.
My weight on earth: 170 lbs
On Mars: 64
But is this really accurate?
I was pursuing the plausibility of the theory that gravity does not exist. Two cars parked side by side do not gravitate to each other. Two large buildings near to each other do not gravitate to each other. If the moon’s gravitational pull can cause the ocean tides, why doesn’t it pull dry leaves off the trees? Or why doesn’t it pull the branches of trees in the rain-forest upward? If two pieces of rocks are dropped from a high building, one the size of a car and the other the size of a pebble, they both hit the ground at the same time. So how then is size relevant to gravitational pull? Or is gravity related to density? The theory of gravity just doesn’t add up.
Density and Buoyancy, Not Gravity.
What we are led into thinking is gravity is really nothing more than buoyancy and density. Denser substances go downwards and less dense ones go upwards. We see it everyday. Hot air goes up, cold air goes down. Oil floats and water goes down. A human being sinks in water, but a piece of wood floats. It is the air in the atmosphere that exerts a slight upward pressure on us and gives us the ability to jump. The denser the air, the greater the upward thrust. On the moon however, where there is allegedly no atmosphere and no air, there is nothing that can cause an upward thrust, or that gives buoyancy. The astronauts who landed on the moon would not have been able to move their feet up from the ground, because there was no air pressure to give them buoyancy.
The Vacuum Effect
One more reason why I believe that the moon-landing might have been faked is the vacuum effect. When NASA showed their video footage of the moon landing, they based it on a scientific principle that existed around that time: gravity. Supposedly, since the moon is much smaller than the earth, the weight of the astronauts would decrease significantly on the moon and they had to be careful not to bounce off the moon. But it has been scientifically proven that the size of an object has nothing to do with the gravitational pull it exerts or that is exerted upon it. Two pieces of rock, one the size of a car, and the other the size of a pebble, were dropped from the top of a high building. They both hit the ground at the same time. A feather and a rock dropped from a high building will hit the ground at different times. The feather will take a significantly longer time to hit the ground because it is far less denser than the rock. This is because the rock’s comparative density to the air is much greater than that of the feather. Dense objects move down and less dense objects move up. And no, it doesn’t have much to do with the shape or the air’s effect on the feather. A metal ball and the soap bubble of the same size and shape will not fall to the ground at the same time. The soap bubble will take longer to go down because it is less denser.
In a vacuum however, both a feather and an iron ball would fly to the bottom of the vacuum at the same rate. And this brings us to the trouble with walking on the moon. If the moon has no atmosphere, as NASA claims, it is essentially a vacuum. We know that a vacuum sucks everything into it. The astronauts who landed on the moon should not have been able to move their feet because there is nothing to create buoyancy. There is nothing to give an upward thrust. The vacuum was supposed to suck everything to the moon’s surface and hold it there. The space shuttle was not supposed to be able to lift off again.
But why would the USA want to lie about landing on the moon? To intimidate the then USSR?. If you are perceived as having landed on the moon, then you might be perceived as a much more formidable military opponent than every other country that didn’t.
The Spinning Atmosphere
Science has taught us that the earth is rotating on its axis at a rate of about 1000 miles per hour. And it makes you wonder how, at such a rate, the rocks at the tops of the mountains do not get displaced. As least, this is the argument of the flat-earthers. How doesn’t all the water in the ocean gets thrown off the earth if it is spinning at such a rate? The answer: Gravity. This is what science has taught us.
By the law of gravity, the earth is not only spinning, but it is also spinning the atmosphere, and everything in the atmosphere with it at the same rate. And it made me wonder if this is really true. Could this be true. If the earth is spinning at a rate of 1000 mph, should it displace the air around it? Shouldn’t the air around it be spinning in the opposite direction? This is the argument of those who believe in a flat earth. But those who put forward a spinning globe earth contend that by virtue of the laws of gravity, the entire atmosphere and everything in it is spinning in the same rate and direction as the earth.
I started to ponder this point more carefully when my friend Joe and I were looking at the flat earth documentary video. In the video, the flat-earthers questioned how it is possible for the earth to be spinning at such a fast rate and pulling the atmosphere along with it.
But at that point, I started to question the same thing.
I said “You know Joe, a long time ago, when I used to use the big boat to cross the river, I remember that when the boat was pulling off, for the first few seconds, it would seem as if the land is moving away, and we wouldn’t feel the boat moving at all. Then, after the boat has distanced itself from the shore to a certain point, I could determine that the boat is moving and not the land. But that was as long as I stood outside along the deck. If I went inside the boat, and sat on a bench and looked downward, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to know that the boat is moving. And this was by virtue of the size of the boat. And if such a small boat, and I say small in comparison to the size of the earth, could conceal its movement, then why not the earth?”
Then another thought crossed my mind. I said, “Joe, by virtue of the laws of the gravity, the boat must have been pulling the atmosphere at the same rate as itself. And if the boat could have done this, then by all indications, the earth could too.”
And then I started to wonder if the boat was dragging the atmosphere around it at the same rate as it was moving. And I thought to myself that a sure of knowing is if I had thrown a marble into the air while I was in the moving boat. And if the marble fell right back into my hands, then the atmosphere and everything in it was being dragged at the same rate as the moving boat, by virtue of the law of gravity. And if this happened, then by all indications, the round-earthers would be correct in saying that the earth can and does drag the atmosphere at the same rate as it is spinning.
But then I said “You know what Joe, I never thought of this before. I never tried throwing a marble up and catching it while in the boat. And I never tried jumping up in the boat to see if I would land back into the same spot or get displaced by virtue of the boat’s movement. But you know what, I’m going to try it sometime. I’m going to try it in a moving car…throw something up and see how it lands.”
The question now arose in my mind whether a moving car drags the atmosphere inside of it. Or whether a moving minibus moving at around 100 miles per hour does the same thing. Interestingly, I had never tried to find out before, because I never questioned whether or not the earth is round, and I never tried to figure out whether the earth could drag the atmosphere along with it.
Then I asked Joe what would happen in a moving airplane. If you threw your keys up, would it fall back into your hands? Or would it be swept backward by virtue of the moving aircraft? I thought about it for a while and I figured that yes it would fall back into your hands. The airplane had to be dragging the atmosphere around it at the same rate as it were moving. If not then everyone’s hat would fly off, their hair would be blown backward, and their clothes, and they wouldn’t be able to walk on the plane.
And the same thing happens for a moving bus. The atmosphere gets dragged along. And if a small plane and bus could drag the air around them, why not the enormous earth? The idea seems plausible. And the idea that the all the water should fly off the spinning earth seemed ridiculous for a second.
But on second thought, the atmosphere inside of a bus or plane and the atmosphere around it are two different scenarios. The plane may drag the atmosphere inside of it because it is sealed up. But it definitely doesn’t drag the air around it. If you don’t believe me, sit on top of a flying plane and see if you don’t fly right off. So the idea is pretty much debatable at this point.
These are just my theories. Prove me wrong.
Do I believe that the earth is flat instead of round? The answer is no. I am just examining both sides of the argument, and weighing the pros and cons. I am neither a flat-earther nor a round-earther, but a “free thinker”.
Update: The Trouble With The Spinning Earth
On the 16th of August, 2016, my friend Joe and decided to look at a “Flat-Earth-Theory Documentary”. It was six hours long. It presented a slew of scientific theories backed up by facts to prove the merits of the flat earth theory. We were almost convinced. During the video, Joe and I would stop to discuss points with each other and most of the time, we seemed to be in favor of a flat earth. Around half way through the video, I exclaimed “Joe, wait a minute, something just hit me!”
“I didn’t throw anything”, he joked.
I laughed. “That’s not what I meant. The spinning earth! That’s what I am talking about”.
I remember seeing NASA-released videos of our earth spinning from outer space. And a thought crossed my mind. How is it possible to see an entire rotation of the earth, which takes about 24 hours, in just a few seconds or minutes? No matter what explanation you try to give of earth time and space time and space/time relativity, it just doesn’t add up. Imagine if there were a digital clock on the camera, counting. So it would go, 1, 2 , 3, 4, 5. I got it! An entire 24-hour rotation in just give seconds! How is that possible? Through time-lapse videos?
Update: The Trouble With the Flat Earth Map – Flying from Rio To Sydney.
While Joe and I were watching the flat earth video, a map of the flat earth came on the screen. Joe said “wait a minute, Australia is not that far away from South America”. On a flat earth, South America and Australia appear on opposite ends of the earth on a straight line. You would have to fly over North America to get to Australia from South America. That would take around 48 hours. But on a globe earth you don’t have to fly over North America to get to Australia from South America. I checked and there are indeed fifteen hour flights from Rio to Sydney. Flat-Earthers, your comments on this discrepancy on your flat-earth map would be appreciated.
Update: The Trouble With The Moon
After looking at some NASA released photos of the earth from the moon, I asked myself the following questions:
Are dust and rock good reflectors of light? I know they can absorb light but can they reflect it?
If the moon is supposed to be on the other side of the earth, shouldn’t the earth block the sun’s rays from reaching it properly?
How is the moon able to focus its light on the earth if it is so far away from the sun?
Update: There is some evidence to prove that the moon does actually exert a gravitational pull on the earth’s oceans. For example, when the moon is full, the waters of the ocean rise higher, and there is high tide. This could point evidence to the theories of the round earth. Flat-earthers, your comments on this phenomenon please?
I will update this article as I examine more and let you know my conclusion on the matter.
Disclaimer: This article expresses the opinion of the author at the time of this writing. The author’s opinion may change from time to time, especially in the light of new discoveries. The opinion statements contained in this article should not be confused as facts.