bahr wrote:Eratosthenes didn't prove anything of the sort. On the contrary, he presupposed that the world is a globe and that the sun is so far that it could be considered at an infinite distance. His goal was to measure the radius of the terrestrial globe by a geometry based on these presuppositions. So, from the Eratosthenes experiment, and according to his premises, we get this figure:
When I get home, I will pull the quotes from the LCL edition of Strabo for discussion here. That might be awhile.
With a flat earth, and a sun at a distance far enough away, the flat-earth recreation of Eratosthenes' experiment also fails. So that interpretation, I believe, must presuppose a small sun at a close distance.
MichaelAllen wrote:Bill, as for why no one has gone to Antarctica and flown beyond it (if indeed it is just an ice wall), it is because (as flat earthers claim) there is some international agreement that is enforced at gun point that individual people cannot go there and explore it... so they say basically that there have been people who were turned away at gunpoint and were put in prison for attempting to do so. I haven't looked this up yet so as to validate it.
The idea that the planet's northern and southern ice masses are simply some sort of "ice wall" seems really silly. I think that in order to believe that were true, the sun would have to be very small, and the flat surface of the earth very large, for the sun's rays to be so weak in the northern and southern regions so as to allow for the accumulation of ice, while warming the central regions to the extent which it does.
But what is really silly is this: what about the eastern and western edges? Why after so many years of exploration and sailing in commerce has no one found them?
Maybe we can start a new contention based on the premise that the earth is a cylinder?
I do not listen to the flat-earther arguments. Well, maybe I did once a long time ago but I was never convinced.