Concave Earth Theory

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: ripvanwillie
Date: 2019-12-15 10:29:57
Reaction Score: 0

As I sad I've no skin in the concave earth theory, However I like you know whatever we stand on isn't spinning which renders the convex thoery null. Water contained always takes the shape of its container and always has a flat surface. We are not equipped to establish the shape of the earth or if indeed it has a shape at all let alone the extent of its land and waters.
So if you wouldn't mind would you share this greatt evidence in this thread?

It's in other posts on this site. I'll briefly respond because you asked, but I do not wish to take this thread there.

The stars cannot have their movements above a flat, disc, bowl, or ring shaped surface. The flat earth model has no south pole. Without a polar south, the star patterns simply don't work. They cannot work. Flat earth believers either don't understand this or simply choose to ignore it. I have not met a single one who can give a solution. The north pole doesn't work either. From there we can get into dozens of other evidences showing the flat earth model to be impossible.

But I do not wish to do that. I don't want to take this thread there. If people want to believe in a flat earth, I'm fine with that. Life is discovery! If they are really "truthers" as they claim, they'll always keep an open mind for other explanations, and will eventually explore the concave earth idea. I just would like people to have an open mind on the subject and help us find answers as main stream science will never be of any help due to it's internal politics. They will only tell us what they want us to believe and I have no reason to believe this will ever change.

As humans, we may never truly have the ability to find absolute proof. However, I do believe if enough people work on it, there will be a preponderance of evidence that shows the concave earth concept to be the most likely scenario.

As for me, I only am concerned with finding the truth. I think I'm on target with the concave earth idea. In twenty five or so years of searching, I have only found more evidence supporting it. And no one has yet to disprove it. I've found a good deal of evidence disproving both the flat earth and convex earth models. The concave earth theory also holds sociopolitical implications as well as economic problems that would absolutely keep any government or scholastic entity far away. The concave earth model causes serious problems for the powers that be. That is why it is taboo.
So here we are.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: jd755
Date: 2019-12-15 10:39:36
Reaction Score: 0

It's in other posts on this site. I'll briefly respond because you asked, but I do not wish to take this thread there.

Thank you. Did you mean your other posts on this site?
EDIT.
I've been through your posts, good job there's only 68, and it eludes me. Just me being blind or thick or both.
Still gibiru served up various articles and forum threads and reading through some I realised I've been there before, years ago when I fell in love with the hollow earth theory.
End of EDIT.
For what its worth I have no idea what shape the thing is all I know is what I stated above.

 

[dreamtime]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: dreamtime
Date: 2019-12-15 12:56:45
Reaction Score: 3

The concave earth theory also holds sociopolitical implications as well as economic problems that would absolutely keep any government or scholastic entity far away. The concave earth model causes serious problems for the powers that be. That is why it is taboo.

If this forum doesnt allow for an open discussion on concave earth, then its worthwhile for those of us who are considering the model, to think about the consequences, of what happens in case more people were aware.

I'd say the realization that we live inside something can't happen as long there isn't a widespread interest in concave earth. Too many people are aware that a flat earth is cosmologically impossible, and goes against everything that can be experienced about this world, and there is no way to logically argue for it.

But no one in academia actually wants to touch the concave earth topic, although there aren't many inconsistencies with the known concepts and observations in science, only different explanations for its origins.

If our earth is concave, then it's highly likely that it isn't the only one, and there are gateways that lead out of it into other realms. If there is a practical way out, many things are suddenly possible, and other things are no longer possible, like enslaving humanity. As long as humans think they live on an isolated planet, or isolated disk surrounded by ice (although those people are few and don't matter on a societal level), its easy to control us.

The last big power that took this idea seriously were the Nazis, and they did look for a way out (obviously at the poles, as well as in Tibet where people believed was an exit through caves), although it looks like they were deliberately pushed by the PTB and then epically destroyed to finally bury certain concepts about reality. While the inner nazi circle believed in concave earth, they also suppressed such ideas in Germany at that time, so they didn't want people to know either.

We live in a time where true knowledge is inverted, just like the elite is believing in an inverted form of the creator, and when it comes to cosmology, they literally inverted the original model, and it seems they destroyed all original writings about it, so that nowadays people do not even know that there was a completely opposite way to look at the world a couple hundred years ago.

Concave earth explains why the poles are off limits in our realm. North and South Pole are managed by intelligence agencies only. It also explains the fear of global warming, as the poles are not allowed to melt, as they are our prison bars.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Banta
Date: 2019-12-15 14:53:43
Reaction Score: 1

The stars cannot have their movements above a flat, disc, bowl, or ring shaped surface. The flat earth model has no south pole. Without a polar south, the star patterns simply don't work. They cannot work. Flat earth believers either don't understand this or simply choose to ignore it. I have not met a single one who can give a solution. The north pole doesn't work either. From there we can get into dozens of other evidences showing the flat earth model to be impossible.

I'd like to see the dozens of other evidences because I don't know how one can declare that star patterns are impossible on a flat earth when we don't even know what the stars are/what they are contained in. Could the sky itself be curved in such a manner? Furthermore, I know personally I can't even be sure what the stars are even doing at the "poles". Using the sky to determine the shape of the Earth is again a classic globe argument, like the concave Earth being so large that it appears flat. Just seems a bit convenient.

If our earth is concave, then it's highly likely that it isn't the only one, and there are gateways that lead out of it into other realms

Maybe, but from my perspective, it seems like concave Earth is the least likely to contain passage to other realms.

It just seems like most good arguments here are really just again reasons why the globe and heliocentric model are highly unlikely.

I am not closed off to the concave earth, I am just failing to see the smoking gun.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: jd755
Date: 2019-12-15 15:03:58
Reaction Score: 1

Found it.
When does it start to curve?

Cannot for the life of me see what goes on over our heads is evidence of what the shape of the thing we walk on is which is nothing more than an edge between two different mediums or densities relative to our own.
Land is more dense than us so we cannot traverse through it.
Air is less dense than us so we can traverse through it.
Water is almost as dense as us so we can float on it. but cannot walk on it.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: ripvanwillie
Date: 2019-12-15 17:06:29
Reaction Score: 1

Found it.
When does it start to curve?

Cannot for the life of me see what goes on over our heads is evidence of what the shape of the thing we walk on is which is nothing more than an edge between two different mediums or densities relative to our own.
Land is more dense than us so we cannot traverse through it.
Air is less dense than us so we can traverse through it.
Water is almost as dense as us so we can float on it. but cannot walk on it.

Call them stars, points of light, gods, whatever. It doesn't matter what the stars are made of, it's the motion they make through the sky that gives us the evidence. They circle around both poles. There is no other explanation for the star patterns. There is no magical technology that allows for this impossible projection. To simply discount those patterns because we don't know the composition of the lights does not change the fact that the motions they make cannot happen if there is no south pole.

I wish I could explain it better so you could understand. I was hoping the diagram I made would be sufficient, but apparently it missed the mark with you others on this forum. Put some thought into it. Envision how those lights in the sky turn. How those patterns can be made. Once you see it, you'll be stunned. But you can't see it if you are stuck in flatland. The lights above you move in a specific pattern. And that pattern cannot be replicated on a flat earth model. It's really that simple.

Here is a link to my post on the celestial mechanics of the so-called stars. I'm not real good using this format, but I think this link will work. Pay special attention to the diagram explaining the need for a south pole. I would think this should become quite obvious once you understand the motions involved.
Stars, Galaxies, Planets: how do we know what they are?

I'd like to see the dozens of other evidences because I don't know how one can declare that star patterns are impossible on a flat earth when we don't even know what the stars are/what they are contained in. Could the sky itself be curved in such a manner? Furthermore, I know personally I can't even be sure what the stars are even doing at the "poles". Using the sky to determine the shape of the Earth is again a classic globe argument, like the concave Earth being so large that it appears flat. Just seems a bit convenient.



Maybe, but from my perspective, it seems like concave Earth is the least likely to contain passage to other realms.

It just seems like most good arguments here are really just again reasons why the globe and heliocentric model are highly unlikely.

I am not closed off to the concave earth, I am just failing to see the smoking gun.

Please see my post above to jd755 for an answer to your question.
To me the concave earth offers the greatest possibility to contain passages to other realms. There are other worlds beneath our feet, maybe even just a few hundred miles away at certain points. There can be up to twelve other planets the same size as earth adjacent to us. And there has been lot's written about these subterranean worlds, the tunnels and passages beneath us. Many stories from indigenous peoples of how their ancestors came from under the earth and such. Even UFO research shows they most likely come from the inside of earth and not from deep space or planets light years away. And of course who is living in those cities underground? And why are most, if not all of the earth's tunnels blocked off? Why do you need governmental permission to explore under the earth?
To me it is clear and obvious. The challenge is to find a way to help others understand it as well. It has nothing to do with intelligence or special knowledge. It's there in plain sight for all of us to see.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Andromeda
Date: 2019-12-15 17:44:42
Reaction Score: 1

Old Christian paintings actually show us that the sun or the core is inside the shell.

If you think of the sun as the core inside the shell, our earth is only a nod connected to the core whereas there are many other nods connected to the same core mirroring how nature actually looks like such as an apple where the sun is the center and we are the fruit body knowingly and unconsciously aware of the other nods of the same fruit body we actually are one with.

Outside the apple are the many other outer worlds and inside the apple are our worlds we are aware of yet unconscious of hence the reason why there is conflicts and confusion in the inner world because other nods of the fruit body wants to eat the core up.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: ripvanwillie
Date: 2019-12-15 18:08:41
Reaction Score: 0

Old Christian paintings actually show us that the sun or the core is inside the shell.

If you think of the sun as the core inside the shell, our earth is only a nod connected to the core whereas there are many other nods connected to the same core mirroring how nature actually looks like such as an apple where the sun is the center and we are the fruit body knowingly and unconsciously aware of the other nods of the same fruit body we actually are one with.

Outside the apple are the many other outer worlds and inside the apple are our worlds we are aware of yet unconscious of hence the reason why there is conflicts and confusion in the inner world because other nods of the fruit body wants to eat the core up.

I'd like to see the specific paintings you are talking about. Can you post examples? Perhaps this sheds light on the apple shaped maps of antiquity.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: jd755
Date: 2019-12-15 18:29:07
Reaction Score: 3

Probably me who is not making myself clear. I'll have another bash.
The thing I walk on is not spinning.
I don't know what the lights in the sky are nor what the sky is.
I cannot tell the difference between a planet and a star nor do I know what the sun and moon are,
What goes on in the sky has no bearing on the shape of the thing I walk on.
I have no idea what if any shape the thing I walk on is or may be nor if it is concave flat, undulating, toroidal or anything else.
I have no idea how big or how small it is.
Contained water always takes the shape of its container and always has a level surface. Water does not bulge or bend or stick to the inside or outside of anything.
This is simply evidence of itself. It neither proves nor disprove anything other than the thing i walk on cannot be convex.

Observable reality is limited by the way the eye works.
I have watched people walk past me and into the distance along a flat road and they disappear from their feet upwards. Cars do the same they disappear from their wheels upwards.
The reason being my eyes are physically closer to the surface than the sky.

All this does is disprove the theory of a ship disappearing hull first as being evidence of a convex surface and proves the limitations of the eye.
None of the above is evidence of any specific shape of this thing I walk on.
Simply said in my objective reality there is no evidence of a spinning ball, concave ball, flat plane. The only thing my objective reality shows me for certain is whatever it is, it isn't spinning.
I am not trying to convince you of anything. You have your objective reality as do we all. The objective evidence of a concave shape is missing in the same way the objective of a convex earth is missing. This doesn't make me a 'flat earther' as you seem to allude to it simply means concave convex and flat are all just labels stuck on theory, to me anways.

 

[dreamtime]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: dreamtime
Date: 2019-12-15 18:41:11
Reaction Score: 1

I'd like to see the specific paintings you are talking about. Can you post examples? Perhaps this sheds light on the apple shaped maps of antiquity.

i’m currently looking for evidence for the idea that the church originally pushed for an earth-centric universe (Ptolemaic Geocentrism) to get people away from concave earth.

Then they doubled down and secretly supported the heliocentric model, and made it look like the conflict was between geocentric and heliocentric.

I remember that the opposition of the Vatican against Galileo wasn’t that clear-cut, and it seems there is indeed evidence that the resistance against him was only a lip-service.

Edit: When you want to understand how the Vatican operates, there is a pretty good understanding of its role in the rise of fascism: God and the Fascists: The Vatican Alliance with Mussolini, Franco, Hitler, and Pavelić

All of this has clearly been documented, but this didnt prevent the Vatican from rewriting this part of their history, claiming they actually opposed Fascism. This is their modus operandi, and it is important to understand that everything they preach is only a facade. They aren't christian, they do not care about the Bible, and they do not care about a geocentric model of the earth. All they care about is taking the truth, and, step for step, burying it or changing it to the opposite, and it doesnt matter to them if they need a couple hundred years for it.

Just like they supported the fascists in order to reach a hidden goal, everything they do follows a secret agenda, going back to the roots of humanity. Without the Vatican, fascism wouldnt have been possible, and the fascist leaders all knew who protected them. When their contract was finished, the Vatican created their 'rat lines' to safely bring them out of the destroyed Europe, leaving behind tens of millions of dead civilians, and a vanished high culture.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Andromeda
Date: 2019-12-15 19:03:17
Reaction Score: 0

I'd like to see the specific paintings you are talking about. Can you post examples? Perhaps this sheds light on the apple shaped maps of antiquity.

I do not know the name of the paintings on a straight arm but I see them circle around on the net. I think I have seen them posted here as well. Maybe dreamtime is our guy to have the paintings resurface here in this thread.

With concave earth it means all outer worlds/stars also has the same make up meaning there is a sun or core inside every star.

What separates us is the mechanics of gravity hence the illusion of isolation.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: jd755
Date: 2019-12-15 19:19:42
Reaction Score: 0

Are the paintings on here?
Concave Earth Theory – The Wild Heretic

OR HERE?
Welcome to Concave Earth Forum

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Andromeda
Date: 2019-12-15 19:25:03
Reaction Score: 0

Are the paintings on here?
Concave Earth Theory – The Wild Heretic

Doesn’t look like it. What I had in mind were the decorated Christian glasses and similar paintings to such decorated glasses where you actually see our core or in public language the sun inside our sky or shell if you wish.

 

[KD Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: KorbenDallas
Date: 2019-12-15 19:29:06
Reaction Score: 2

I'm OK with whatever shape as long as its not the known CGI model. I also think that we live on a flat surface, because this is the only thing I can see with my own eyes. Water surface does not curve in the areas I travel.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: ripvanwillie
Date: 2019-12-15 19:30:37
Reaction Score: 1

Probably me who is not making myself clear. I'll have another bash.
The thing I walk on is not spinning.
I don't know what the lights in the sky are nor what the sky is.
I cannot tell the difference between a planet and a star nor do I know what the sun and moon are,
What goes on in the sky has no bearing on the shape of the thing I walk on.
I have no idea what if any shape the thing I walk on is or may be nor if it is concave flat, undulating, toroidal or anything else.
I have no idea how big or how small it is.
Contained water always takes the shape of its container and always has a level surface. Water does not bulge or bend or stick to the inside or outside of anything.
This is simply evidence of itself. It neither proves nor disprove anything other than the thing i walk on cannot be convex.

Observable reality is limited by the way the eye works.
I have watched people walk past me and into the distance along a flat road and they disappear from their feet upwards. Cars do the same they disappear from their wheels upwards.
The reason being my eyes are physically closer to the surface than the sky.

View attachment 35980

All this does is disprove the theory of a ship disappearing hull first as being evidence of a convex surface and proves the limitations of the eye.
None of the above is evidence of any specific shape of this thing I walk on.
Simply said in my objective reality there is no evidence of a spinning ball, concave ball, flat plane. The only thing my objective reality shows me for certain is whatever it is, it isn't spinning.
I am not trying to convince you of anything. You have your objective reality as do we all. The objective evidence of a concave shape is missing in the same way the objective of a convex earth is missing. This doesn't make me a 'flat earther' as you seem to allude to it simply means concave convex and flat are all just labels stuck on theory, to me anways.

There are a couple of things you said that I must respectfully disagree with.

First, "What goes on in the sky has no bearing on the shape of the thing I walk on."

This statement tells me you are not understanding what I'm laying out. It has everything to do with the shape of the planet. I honestly don't see how this is not clear to you, so there's nothing more for me to offer on this point. Please put it to a thought experiment. I'm confident it will come to you if you open your mind and stop believing that the shape has no bearing. This is an excellent example of a closed mind keeping you from seeing the obvious. No slight intended as we all suffer from this bias at times.

Second, "Contained water always takes the shape of its container and always has a level surface. Water does not bulge or bend or stick to the inside or outside of anything."
This statement is patently false on both counts. Water is never level. Water is never flat. It just looks that way to us. Water absolutely bulges and dips with the tides, the currents underneath, and the air pressure above. This can be easily seen if you go to the shore of the ocean or any large body of water. When there is low air pressure, the water tends to bulge upward. When there is high air pressure, it pushes the water down.

Take a spirit level for example.
Is the bubble inside ever flat? No. Does it take on the cylindrical shape of it's container? No. Nor does the water.
Now look at what's happening inside of it. The water underneath the bubble of air is concave!
The bubble of air creates pressure from above forcing the water to the side, thus creating a concave water surface. It is always round and the water beneath is always concave. The tool works not because water is level, rather because it is not. It is the bubble trying to stay in the middle of the lines that tells us if the measured item is level or not.
If water were level a spirit level would not be possible as the air inside would not form a bubble. It would disperse parallel to the waters surface completely to both ends of the cylinder and be kept at the top because air is lighter than water. I hope this is clear to you.

Third, your example of perspective does not address the concave earth at all. Our optical perspectives work fine in a concave earth scenario. I don't understand your objection there.

I do not know the name of the paintings on a straight arm but I see them circle around on the net. I think I have seen them posted here as well. Maybe dreamtime is our guy to have the paintings resurface here in this thread.

With concave earth it means all outer worlds/stars also has the same make up meaning there is a sun or core inside every star.

What separates us is the mechanics of gravity hence the illusion of isolation.

"With concave earth it means all outer worlds/stars also has the same make up meaning there is a sun or core inside every star."

I don't think I understand your point here, care to elaborate? In my thinking, there is only one sun. The stars are something completely different.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Andromeda
Date: 2019-12-15 20:15:03
Reaction Score: 0

There are a couple of things you said that I must respectfully disagree with.

First, "What goes on in the sky has no bearing on the shape of the thing I walk on."

This statement tells me you are not understanding what I'm laying out. It has everything to do with the shape of the planet. I honestly don't see how this is not clear to you, so there's nothing more for me to offer on this point. Please put it to a thought experiment. I'm confident it will come to you if you open your mind and stop believing that the shape has no bearing. This is an excellent example of a closed mind keeping you from seeing the obvious. No slight intended as we all suffer from this bias at times.

Second, "Contained water always takes the shape of its container and always has a level surface. Water does not bulge or bend or stick to the inside or outside of anything."
This statement is patently false on both counts. Water is never level. Water is never flat. It just looks that way to us. Water absolutely bulges and dips with the tides, the currents underneath, and the air pressure above. This can be easily seen if you go to the shore of the ocean or any large body of water. When there is low air pressure, the water tends to bulge upward. When there is high air pressure, it pushes the water down.

View attachment 35987

Take a spirit level for example.
Is the bubble inside ever flat? No. Does it take on the cylindrical shape of it's container? No. Nor does the water.
Now look at what's happening inside of it. The water underneath the bubble of air is concave!
The bubble of air creates pressure from above forcing the water to the side, thus creating a concave water surface. It is always round and the water beneath is always concave. The tool works not because water is level, rather because it is not. It is the bubble trying to stay in the middle of the lines that tells us if the measured item is level or not.
If water were level a spirit level would not be possible as the air inside would not form a bubble. It would disperse parallel to the waters surface completely to both ends of the cylinder and be kept at the top because air is lighter than water. I hope this is clear to you.

Third, your example of perspective does not address the concave earth at all. Our optical perspectives work fine in a concave earth scenario. I don't understand your objection there.


"With concave earth it means all outer worlds/stars also has the same make up meaning there is a sun or core inside every star."

I don't think I understand your point here, care to elaborate? In my thinking, there is only one sun. The stars are something completely different.

Perhaps you are right about stars are something entirely different. The distance between our sight and the stars is only a thumb between and so is everything else here.

The distance between you and me here can be measured with units of length, however the distance of us while we breathe here cannot be measured since there is no distance in the air we breathe and there is a rhythm of our bodies how we function with nature and that is for example how many breathes you take each minute, how much you eat, how much you sleep and that is time. The time here and in neighboring outer worlds is one and the same and time cannot be measured in distance. Time can only be counted.

Units of length is what make us very confused of time. It might or might not take a whole lifetime to reach the next star. It could actually be one beer away at your local pub. Which is time!

Time that is now is the biggest secret of all mysteries. If we unlock time I think we unlock the true shape of Earth. Forget about distance. It’s all about time. Will we ever find out what time it is at Mars? Do they have seconds, minutes and hours as counters?

We might find out.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: jd755
Date: 2019-12-15 20:16:10
Reaction Score: 1

How could one be sleighted by words on a screen.
The air bubble in a spirit level aka in alchohol has nothing to do with the behaviour of water.
IIt is interesting what you choose to comment on and what you leave alone, to me anyways.
I've been off down some iteresting routes today Lord Steven Christ, ifers, wild heretic, this place THE COSMOS and many others and can find no objective evidence of the existence of a concave, flat or convex earth shape.
It all seems to be people defending their models ad nauseum whuch speaks volumes really.
My objective reality is what it is.

 

[Whitewave]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: whitewave
Date: 2019-12-15 20:57:59
Reaction Score: 1

When reading the level of fluid in a beaker, one has to hold it at eye level to account for the meniscus (which is concave). It may or may not lend evidence to a concave model of Earth and, frankly, I don't care but fluids do curve up on the edges of a container. May be more noticeable in a beaker than in an ocean or the phenomenon may not transfer to wider fluid containers such as oceans. Again, don't know, don't care. The entire issue doesn't strike me as something we'll solve on this site.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: ripvanwillie
Date: 2019-12-16 01:12:10
Reaction Score: 1

How could one be sleighted by words on a screen.
The air bubble in a spirit level aka in alchohol has nothing to do with the behaviour of water.
IIt is interesting what you choose to comment on and what you leave alone, to me anyways.
I've been off down some iteresting routes today Lord Steven Christ, ifers, wild heretic, this place THE COSMOS and many others and can find no objective evidence of the existence of a concave, flat or convex earth shape.
It all seems to be people defending their models ad nauseum whuch speaks volumes really.
My objective reality is what it is.

I comment on what I feel I need to, primarily questions. But if I missed something you'd like my views on please state it specifically. I'm happy to oblige.

I've gone down those rabbit holes as well you might imagine. And I fully get your point. To me, this subject is about cosmogony and has nothing to do with religion. The only one that I find appealing out of that group is Wild Heretic. There are some interesting finds posted there, just not elaborated on in great depth. But I think there is a lot to learn from that site. It was carefully and accurately thought out and presented.

As far as the objective evidence you seek, I think that depends on your own personal criteria and attitude. What is objective evidence for you may be quite different than for others. And that may change based on bias. No one can see what's inside your head. And if you go into it with the attitude of "prove it to me" you'll probably come away empty handed.

I gave you a very good piece of evidence about spirit levels, and you apparently rejected it on your belief that it is alcohol and not water. Spirit levels are produced using alcohol to increase the operating temperatures of the device and has nothing to do with the underlying principle. I think we all know at what temperature water freezes. A spirit level still works exactly the same if water is used in place of alcohol.

And you can argue whether or not the water caused the shape of the bubble or the bubble caused the shape of the water. Either way it's still the same. The water is concave, not flat.

When reading the level of fluid in a beaker, one has to hold it at eye level to account for the meniscus (which is concave). It may or may not lend evidence to a concave model of Earth and, frankly, I don't care but fluids do curve up on the edges of a container. May be more noticeable in a beaker than in an ocean or the phenomenon may not transfer to wider fluid containers such as oceans. Again, don't know, don't care. The entire issue doesn't strike me as something we'll solve on this site.

I get it. It's called apathy. You don't know and you don't care. But you know what? Others do.

And if you don't think that it can be solved here then why did you feel the need to comment? Were you just trying to burst my bubble? I love the pun!

But not exactly what I'd call a contribution.

I was under the impression that this is a forum for open discussion. Please tell me what issues have or will be solved here that are acceptable to you so we may discuss them openly and without your indifference.

When it comes to stolen history, I can't imagine a subject larger than earth and our entire universe.

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Willielad
Date: 2019-12-16 02:24:10
Reaction Score: 0

So in the concave earth, are we inside or outside? If on the inside, which i think you are saying. What holds the water on the outside? Can you explain how the sun would travel? I guess it could just head east but it seems it would show on the otherside of the world.