Sure, but that’s when it becomes “space travel,” which, according to them, is impossible.
Here’s an idea:
According to the flat model of the Earth, Buenos Aires, Argentina is a lot further from Auckland, New Zealand than Los Angeles, California. According to the round model, they are about the same distance.
So you can arguably test the Flat Earth hypothesis by looking up airline flight times. I imagine Flat Earthers would respond that the airlines are all lying as part of the conspiracy, but still.
uhhh - that only proves that the flat earth is circular - it does not prove it is a sphere!
Oh my. That has got to be the most hilarious site I’ve ever visited. It’s literally hours of knee-slapping entertainment. I highly recommend it. 
That stated, I think the owners of that site must be having a go at us. From their assertion that the Sun is only 3000 miles away, the planets are held in place in a dome above the Earth, gravity doesn’t exist, the oceans are prevented from draining away by an “ice wall” surrounding the Earth, to the particularly humorous concept of Universal Acceleration, or UA, which causes the Earth to come up to meet our feet when we jump, as opposed to us dropping back to the ground, you almost have to give it to them for their imagination and for keeping “in character” for as long as the site’s been going.
Good stuff! I think I’ll become a member
Refraction. The air, being of different densities at different heights, refracts light, causing the apparent line toward an object, such as a ship, to bend.
(Hey, hold on… This is actually true… It just happens to work the other way around! Rather than making a ship appear to “sink” under the horizon, the actual effect is that we can see a ship just slightly farther away – just over the horizon! The air refracts the image upward not downward.)
So…the modern flat-earther simply declares that air refracts in the opposite direction than in reality. Taken to an extreme, people in space see a “sphere,” but it’s really a compressed image, like the picture through a fish-eye lens.
This also explains why the sun is in the sky in, say, Los Angeles, while it is not in the sky in New Delhi. Refraction.
Yessiree, for the modern flat-earther, the key magic word is refraction. They use it the way new-Age mystics use “vibrations” and “wavelengths” and quantum stuff. Isn’t magic fun?
FES slogan: “There is nothing to sphere but sphere itself - but watch your step!”
(Stolen from National Review, of all places, from 40 years or so ago.)
Yeah, despite their disclaimer, I’m not convinced it’s for real.
Pterry once pointed out that if the world rests on a turtle (as opposed to a tortoise), there need not be a bottomless stack of them, but just one, swimming through the void. We should prefer the one-turtle model because of (1) Occam’s Razor, and (2) the infinite-turtles model is a bit silly, isn’t it?
Touché.
I was responding to your claim that “people in the past never did really believe the Earth was flat”. Yes they did, up until some time in the 5th century BC.
There may well have been a time in the early Middle Ages, the so called “Dark Ages” when few people in Western Europe were aware of the fact, but from the early 12th century onward the works of Aristotle had been rediscovered and had become the basis of education in the universities established across Europe that produced a growing educated class. Aristotle is quite clear about the sphericity of the Earth, and the fact is quite central to his account of the structure and workings of the universe. Anybody with even a basic understanding of Aristotelian philosophy, which meant anyone with more than an elementary level of education, could not have failed to be aware of it.
Even during the darkest of the Dark Ages, when most of the works of Aristotle were unknown in the west, there continued to be a few scholars who were familiar with the cosmological theory laid out by Plato in his Timaeus, and although the sphericity of the Earth is not quite so crucial an issue for Plato as it is for Aristotle, I am fairly sure that it is nevertheless mentioned and taken for granted in the Timaeus. Almost certainly there is also mention of it in the works of ancient Christian thinkers influenced by Aristotle and Plato, such as St Augustine and Boethius, who were also not forgotten even in the “darkest” times.
Come to that, I would not be at all surprised if the fact is not mentioned in passing in the New Testament somewhere. It would have been common knowledge, at least amongst the educated, in Jesus’ time and after, and although Jesus himself may not have had much “Greek” education, the people who wrote the New Testament certainly did (as evidenced by the fact that they wrote it, and wrote it in Greek). The shape of the Earth does not have much bearing on the Christian message, one way or the other, so it isn’t directly tackled in the New Testament, but it is probably mentioned somewhere.
I do not know about “most people” in Columbus’ day. Most people were still illiterate (including common sailors). Bur Washington Irving’s story, I believe, has him trying to persuade royalty, Ferdinand and Isabella, of the sphericity of the Earth. That is absurd. Most likely they themselves would have had enough of an Aristotelian education (it would only take a basic smattering) to know, and even if they didn’t, they would have had well educated court advisors who would quickly have confirmed for them that yes, what Sr. Columbus was saying (on this point) was most certainly true.
Yes, sorry I was not more clear. I was actually thinking of Columbus’ day and not that far back.
How do different parts of the world see different constellations? How do they explain the position of Polaris in the sky changing with your position on the surface? How do they explain the annual motion of the Sun through the Zodiacal constellations?
Carl Sagan explains how Eratosthenes proved the Earth is round and calculated its circumference.
Well, now this is odd. There is a link from the front page to a site for the North Pole Inner Earth Expedition, based on the theory that the (spherical) earth is hollow, the center of the gravitational force is in the middle layer of the shell, there is a small sun at the earth’s core, and a hole at the north pole equalizes the atmospheric pressure between the inner region and the outer region. The ocean coats the inside as well, so they plan to sail through the hole into the inner part and meet up with the folks in there.
All well and good, but they have a goal of $700K.us to fund the expedition – for which they are $1728 toward their goal.
:eek: :rolleyes:
I poked around on the FE MBs, not nearly as fun as here, but they have their own **PIT **
It is called…
Angry Ranting
Wouldn’t let me in there think you have to sign up, hmm maybe
Capt
Nowadays, Flat Earth Theory is very easily “refudiated”. 
Anyone with a few hundred dollars to spare can fire their own rocket into the upper atmosphere with a digital camera attached and bring back photos that very clearly show the curvature of the Earth, without having to rely on hearsay or the “filter” of a conspiratorial media. If only conclusive evidence of Global Climate Change were as easy to acquire!
Did you just do what I think you did? 
Maybe the thin atmosphere bends the light rays, creating the illusion of a curved Earth.
Sure, since the digital camera manufacturers have all incorporated image manipulation software to make it look curved..
Yes, the winner of ‘Most Obscure Pun Involving A 1960’s Cartoon Character’ is Onomatopoeia!
:smack:
Refraction! The “fisheye lens” effect. You gotter keep up with modern flatheads!