Flat Earth

[Kaesekopf]

The internet also manufacturers idiots. Before the internet, the number of people who still thought the Earth was flat was like 0.0001%. Now it has grown ten times. It allows wilful ignorance to be published.

Before the internet, you either had to be rich to self publish, or your work was scrutinized and verified before a publisher would accept it.

But today, any idiot can upload a video to YouTube, or run a blog, and be seen by others within minutes. The feeble minded, are far more susceptible to wishing to believe this hogwash today because with Google confirmation bias is much easier to fall into than with the Dewey Decimal System.

You telling me that random blog I found on blogspot.com isn't reliable?...  O.o

[red solo cup]

Hollow earth is much more plausible than flat earth.

[Daniel]

I have never personally met a flat-earther, but I have come across them on Facebook back when I used Facebook. Apparently they are mostly KJV-onlyists who base their model solely on their interpretation of Scripture as it is translated in the King James version (e.g. the KJV's Isaias 40:22 says the earth is a "circle" rather than a "globe"). Since they reject tradition and the hierarchy, they really don't care that their interpretation is a relatively new one, not in agreement with the Church nor with any serious theologian. And since science also says that flat earth isn't true, they are forced to deny science and resort to conspiracy theories such as the claims that NASA is making up data, that nobody has ever been into space (I think they cite John 3:13 for that one...), that all our satellites are fake and all the images from them are fake, etc.

[inlaetitia]

Hey,

I am a traditional Catholic and accept the earth to be flat. There are lots of us.

Here is an introductory video to the topic





I'm willing to have a discussion with people as long as they are polite.

[Kaesekopf]

[emoji38]

Sent from my STV100-1 using Tapatalk

[Mono no aware]

The interesting aspect of the Flat Earth theory is that it would constitute some sort of extreme variant on the Omphalos hypothesis, in which the earth would not only have the deceptive appearance of an old age, but would also have the deceptive appearance of a sphere.  I personally don't discount the Omphalos hypothesis, but there seems to be no end as to how elaborate the deception might be, and this presents philosophical problems of solipsism or idealism.  If creation is supposed to be actual and material, as the Scholastics have it, then it doesn't seem tenable.  It dovetails more easily with something like Plato or Vedanta.

Not unsurprisingly, Borges is mentioned in the Wikipedia entry. 

[Matto]

I follow Cathinfo so I have seen the flat earth threads and even talked with some of the flat-earthers trying to be open minded and asking questions. I don't mind the discussions and I have no problem with conspiracy theories but I thought some of them went too far. Not only was the belief in a flat earth declared, but it was basically preached as a dogma (by some, not all) and that those who did not believe in the flat earth were not Catholics or at least were bad Catholics. I can understand doing that about geocentrism because heliocentrism was actually condemned by the Church at one time. But I was not aware of the Church ever condemning the belief in a geocentric globe earth, though the flat-earthers can give some quotes from early Church men who did believe in the flat earth. I don't know if they really do believe in the flat earth or if they are just trolls. I remember seeing a video of Father Joseph Pfeiffer where he was arguing with a few members of his resistance who supported the flat earth while Father Pfeiffer rejected the flat earth and believed in the geocentric globe earth. It was very interesting to me but I think it would bore everyone else.

I also found it interesting that people pointed to "Christian Topography" by the Alexandrian monk Cosmas Indicopleustes as evidence that in the early Church the flat earth was believed, but none of the flat earthers seemed to believe in the model of Cosmas. Their flat-earth models were very different from his.

[inlaetitia]

The interesting aspect of the Flat Earth theory is that it would constitute some sort of extreme variant on the Omphalos hypothesis, in which the earth would not only have the deceptive appearance of an old age, but would also have the deceptive appearance of a sphere.  I personally don't discount the Omphalos hypothesis, but there seems to be no end as to how elaborate the deception might be, and this presents philosophical problems of solipsism or idealism.  If creation is supposed to be actual and material, as the Scholastics have it, then it doesn't seem tenable.  It dovetails more easily with something like Plato or Vedanta.

Not unsurprisingly, Borges is mentioned in the Wikipedia entry. 

this hypothesis is total blasphemy, because it says God is a liar. The earth can't be both round and flat. So if there are things that seem to indicate roundness, it is just an appearance. There are greater things which disprove it.

[inlaetitia]

I follow Cathinfo so I have seen the flat earth threads and even talked with some of the flat-earthers trying to be open minded and asking questions. I don't mind the discussions and I have no problem with conspiracy theories but I thought some of them went too far. Not only was the belief in a flat earth declared, but it was basically preached as a dogma (by some, not all) and that those who did not believe in the flat earth were not Catholics or at least were bad Catholics. I can understand doing that about geocentrism because heliocentrism was actually condemned by the Church at one time. But I was not aware of the Church ever condemning the belief in a geocentric globe earth, though the flat-earthers can give some quotes from early Church men who did believe in the flat earth. I don't know if they really do believe in the flat earth or if they are just trolls. I remember seeing a video of Father Joseph Pfeiffer where he was arguing with a few members of his resistance who supported the flat earth while Father Pfeiffer rejected the flat earth and believed in the geocentric globe earth. It was very interesting to me but I think it would bore everyone else.

I also found it interesting that people pointed to "Christian Topography" by the Alexandrian monk Cosmas Indicopleustes as evidence that in the early Church the flat earth was believed, but none of the flat earthers seemed to believe in the model of Cosmas. Their flat-earth models were very different from his.

I know a LOT of flat earthers, and I have never met a single one who has said that Catholics who believe the globe are bad Catholics.

Happy that you are interested and open to the topic.

What is your biggest obstacle to accepting the flat earth?

[CilantroTamales]

Dear inlaetitia:
Thanks for posting and honestly representing your beliefs.  Question: if I start at a fixed point (say Rome, Italy) and went due West, flat earth theory would state that I would hit Antarctica and round earth theory would state that I would eventually end exactly where I started, yes?  Also, the total distance of Antarctica's coastline would be vastly different under the two theories, yes?

Thanks again...

[Kaesekopf]

How the heck do you explain away satellites? 

Sent from my STV100-1 using Tapatalk

[Mono no aware]

this hypothesis is total blasphemy, because it says God is a liar. The earth can't be both round and flat. So if there are things that seem to indicate roundness, it is just an appearance. There are greater things which disprove it.

I don't know if it can be called blasphemy per se; St. Augustine and St. Ephraim both suggested it.  If creation was ex nihilo, then everything appeared fully-formed instantaneously.  Adam and Eve were created as adults, not infants.  Had you met them, they would've had the appearance of being in their twenties or thirties, but in reality they could've been two months old.  The first sequoia trees would not have been hundreds of years old in the first week of creation, even though they had never been saplings.

If the earth is a disc, and the borders of Antarctica are at the edges of the disc, then presumably we could arrive at the outer rim of the earth just by penetrating into the coast of Antarctica.  But this is not what happens, so the appearance of a spherical earth must be a deception.

[Mono no aware]

How the heck do you explain away satellites?

In the video, they allege that satellite images are faked by NASA.  They do, however, accept the veracity of air travel (although they claim the appearance of curvature from an airplane window is an optical illusion caused by defects in the plexiglass).  Allowing for air travel, I imagine that the easiest way to prove a round earth would be to let a flat earther co-pilot a flight over Antarctica.  (Their map of the earth as a disc posits the coast of Antarctica as the edges of the earth's rim).

[LouisIX]

The internet also manufacturers idiots. Before the internet, the number of people who still thought the Earth was flat was like 0.0001%. Now it has grown ten times. It allows wilful ignorance to be published.

Before the internet, you either had to be rich to self publish, or your work was scrutinized and verified before a publisher would accept it.

But today, any idiot can upload a video to YouTube, or run a blog, and be seen by others within minutes. The feeble minded, are far more susceptible to wishing to believe this hogwash today because with Google confirmation bias is much easier to fall into than with the Dewey Decimal System.

In this way, the internet is an absolute plague.

[Chestertonian]

So.. if you're a flat earth homeschooler what do you do for science? Are there vflat earth science and history texts