The Earth, Spherical or Flat?

THE ANCIENTS DID NOT BELIEVE THE EARTH WAS FLAT

by Frederick Guttmann R.

The idea that the ancients believed the Earth was flat has been taught in schools, and is still a popular argument. This alleged belief assumed that at the "end of the world," the sea ended, and you fell into the void and could even be devoured by dragons. But who reached that limit to tell such a story? There is no evidence of this. What's more, the Vikings—legendary experts in navigation—had reached Newfoundland (in Canada) in the 10th century AD, and none of their myths warn of the end of the Earth's "edge." Allusions to the "end" of the world referred to the farthest, most extreme, or the particularly unknown reaches of certain cultures. It must be considered that the sea was the limit of all solid land, and its confines had been unexplored and feared for thousands of years. Furthermore, offshore, the enormous waves are a danger to sailors. The idea that the planet was believed to be a plate is not even documented, and it is argued that ancient peoples thought the world consisted of several levels within a supposed "horizontal plate." The truth is that a sphere cannot be represented in two dimensions (a drawing); it can only be drawn on a plane. Meanwhile, the uses of the word "sphere" were applied to existential reality, such as "sphere of existence," "sphere of life," or "celestial sphere," and the term "circle" was understood as a generic form (which has nothing to do with "plain," as some flat-earthers try to make us believe).

Mesopotamians

The engravings that many suggest as supporting these ideas are "representations" of the conception of "worlds" and realms (land, sea, and sky), not world maps. In other words, the drawings were intended to show what the artist believed the ancients thought, but they were not a replica of an ancient engraving, nor were they a documentation of their knowledge of the so-called "edges" of the world. If we take into consideration the remote narratives, they do not say that the Earth ended beyond the ocean, or that it was flat and limited; they only spoke of—or encompassed—the existence of the celestial sphere of reality, the terrestrial sphere, and the marine sphere: three worlds in one. This is the case of the Sumerian worldview, which is taken as the main reference to argue this flat-earth error. The Babylonian account of the creation of the world says nothing about the Earth as a plate, and on the contrary, speaks of the appearance of Heaven and Earth after the existence of Apsu and Tiamat (Nammu for the Sumerians).

Apsu represented the deeply abyssal waters, whose depth could not be measured, while Tiamat represented chaos or the absence of an established order. This is the same concept cited in so many texts, such as the Tao Te Ching itself, or the Hebrew Genesis of Moses, which speaks of 'tohu vabohu' (chaotic and abysmal), the principle of liquid and solid composition that gave rise to the planets of our solar system (details narrated with great precision in the Second Book of Enoch, a manuscript of almost incalculable antiquity). Later, the gods were born from the union of Absu and Tiamat, but who were these gods? Any study of comparative mythology will conclude that the pantheonic gods, and the analytical accounts of the origin of the world, are names and descriptions of the planets of our solar system and the formation of the system itself. How did those people know this, if the theories of the formation of the solar system are supposedly recent (the nebular hypothesis—which is the widely accepted one—was only first developed in the 18th century by Emanuel Swedenborg, Emanuel Kant, and Pierre-Simon Laplace)?

There are numerous Assyrian and Babylonian representations showing the major gods with the Sun, the Moon, and other "bodies." One of these Assyrian representations shows the Sun casting its rays on 11 bodies surrounding it. The ancients included the Moon among the planets of the solar system, and it should also be added here that Uranus was supposedly only discovered in 1781, Neptune in 1846, and Pluto in 1930. If the Sun is depicted on Mesopotamian cylinders with 11 round bodies, how does that explain the fallacious argument that ancient peoples believed the Earth was flat? Not only do they show the Earth as round, but they seem to imply that there are—or were at that time—more planetary bodies, at least within the standard defined by those peoples. Although Pluto was ruled out as a planet in 2006 (entering the category dubbed "dwarf planets"), it follows the average distance of the planets in the system, and with the Moon would total 10 celestial bodies (counting Uranus and Neptune). Therefore, these types of engravings could support theories about extinct planets like Maldek, with highly eccentric ellipticals like the theoretical Nibiru, or simply a "canon" of planets distinct from our own, which, just as it could have included Pluto, could also have included Eris (or even Ceres, Makemake, Haumea, Orcus, Ixion, or Sedna).

Egyptians

It is often said that the first civilization was the Sumerian—although this has been progressively rejected in light of further scientific discoveries—and that they were followed by the Egyptians. The point is that this people also left no record of such a “end of the Earth” and an abyss at the “edge” of the journey into the sea: “…you are complete and [are] great in your name of 'Sea'; look, you are great and round in (your name of) 'Ocean'; look, you are circular and round like the circle that surrounds the Aeo-bifao (aeo-ebot)” (Pyramid Texts, Declaration 366:628-629. Approx. 2,400 BC) Consequently, we would be assuming that the ancients understood all the “spheres” of reality in the universe based on the circular form, like balls, and this even appears in even more remote descriptions related to Egyptians and “Atlanteans”. This is the case of some ancient emerald tablets found in Yucatán—which speak of these ancient civilizations—and whose age is estimated to be between 13,000 and 32,000 years old (against all predictions and academic criticism). Their writer makes comments such as: "Know, O man, that all space is filled with worlds within worlds; yes, one within the other, yet separated by Law." (Tablet IX)

The mysterious writer—who managed to engrave Demotic in relief on emerald stone (something inexplicable)—claimed to be Dyehuty himself (or better known as "Thoth"), a master of Egyptian literature, and recounted: "First, I will speak of the shackles of darkness that bind them in chains to the sphere of the Earth." (Tablet XV, Emerald Tablets of Thoth) In addition to already stating at that time that the Earth was a sphere, he develops a dialogue regarding the law of gravity, which we know was openly postulated in modern times by Isaac Newton (circa 1680). But in addition to Dyehuty, another famous figure of Greek and Egyptian antiquity was Hermes Trismegistus, an individual of origin and nature surrounded by legends, but who left behind very impressive writings for his time (which some consider contemporary with the patriarch Abraham (20th century BC) and others with that of Moses (15th century BC)). Among his astonishing statements and conversations with his disciples Tat, Amun or Asclepius (the Greek 'Aesculapius'), we find: "- But then, O Trismegistus, how is it possible that things that move here below do so together with their movers? For it is said that the spheres of the wandering stars are moved by the spheres of the fixed stars. - "This is not, Asclepius, a matter of a conjoined movement, but of an opposing movement: they do not move in a similar manner, but in a contrary manner. And this opposition has as its support a fixed point that balances the movements." (From Hermes to Tat, Corpus Herméticum)

The ancients called the planets “wandering stars” or “cold stars” (as was the case with the Hebrews, who also used the expression “cold star” or “stone star” to distinguish them from the suns). The word “planet” comes from the Greek word “planiti” (wandering), and although it might seem shocking that they knew so much about astrophysics, they did: “The Father created the All as a body, and by giving it volume, he made it in the likeness of a sphere…” (Treatise VIII). He adds: “Moreover, the Father, scattering the variety of species in the sphere, enclosed them there as in a cave, for he wished to bestow the beauty of his own abundance in the form of complete diversity.” (vs. 3) We could go on and on about so many statements about the motion and composition of the stars, but the point is to understand that cultures have shown a regression in their development in the distant past, and from that critical point they began to emerge again, contrary to the popular belief that man emerged from the caves and only just began to discover the world and knowledge (for this reason the pyramids of the Egyptian dynasties are cruder and more ridiculous, getting worse with the passing of the decades, when compared to those existing before the emerging dynasties of Menes I).

Greeks

"In his work 'De Caelo', Aristotle (4th century BC) gives a reasoned explanation of why the Earth is a sphere and cites a value for its circumference that is correct within a factor of two. In the 3rd century BC, Eratosthenes gives a more accurate estimate of its circumference. By the time of Pliny the Elder, in the first century, most Western scholars accepted that the Earth was spherical. Around this time, Claudius Ptolemy derived his maps from a curved globe and developed the system of latitude, longitude, and climates. His writings became the basis of European astronomy throughout the Middle Ages, although late antiquity and the early Middle Ages saw occasional arguments for a flat Earth. The modern misconception that people in the Middle Ages believed the Earth was flat first entered the popular imagination in the 19th century. (Wikipedia)

Considering Wikipedia's clear explanation, it is notable that the belief in a flat Earth that ended beyond the sea was also not true for the Greeks. Although Plato believed that, by geometric and symmetrical logic, the Earth must be spherical, the absolute or definitive confirmation of the Earth's sphericity came in 1522, when the Portuguese navigator Ferdinand Magellan completed the first circumnavigation of the globe. However, the Greeks, without apparent Egyptian influence, also understood this principle: "Those who have returned in an attempt to circumnavigate the Earth do not say that they were prevented from doing so by the presence of a continent in their path, because the sea remained perfectly open, but rather by lack of determination and scarcity of provisions. Eratosthenes says that were it not for the obstacle represented by the expanse of the Atlantic Ocean, he could reach India from Iberia." (Strabo, 1st-century AD geographer)

Another example: “There are two forms that surpass all others: among solid bodies the sphere—which is equivalent to the Greek “sfaira”—and among plane figures the circle or circumference, “kyklos” in Greek. Now, these two forms alone possess the property of absolute uniformity in all their parts, and that each and every point of their circumference is equidistant from the center; and nothing can be more appropriate than this. However, if you Epicureans cannot understand this, because you have never touched this learned dust, could you not even attain to knowing enough natural philosophy to understand at least that the uniform motion and regular arrangement of the celestial bodies could not have been maintained by any other form? Therefore, nothing can be more unscientific than your favorite assertion that it is not true that our world itself is spherical, since it is possible that it has some other form, and that countless numbers of worlds exist, all of different forms.” (Cicero, 'On the Nature of the Gods', chap. 18:47-48. 1st century BC)

Speaking about the law of gravity, he adds: "But not only are these things marvelous, but there is nothing more remarkable than the stability and coherence of the world, which is such that it is impossible even to imagine anything better arranged for endurance. For all its parts, in whatever direction they move, gravitate toward the center with a uniform force or pressure. Moreover, bodies that are united maintain their union in the most permanent way when they have some bond that encircles or surrounds them to keep them tied; and this function is fulfilled by that rational and intelligent substance that permeates the entire world as the efficient cause of all things and that draws and gathers the most external particles toward the center. Therefore, if the world is round, and therefore all its parts support themselves and each other in a universal equilibrium, the same must occur on Earth, so that all its parts must converge toward the center—which in a sphere is the lowest point—without anything breaking the continuity and thus threatening the dissolution of its vast complex of gravitational forces and masses. And, according to the same principle, the sea, although situated above the Earth, nevertheless seeks the center of the Earth and thus has the shape of a sphere that is uniform throughout, and never floods its shores or overflows its banks. (45:115-116)

But going back much further, to the time of Greek myths, we find quotes about their cosmogony, which also does not support the idea of ​​a flat Earth that geographically ended at some point: "It was not a river, properly speaking, but a principle of unity. It was circular. Infinite. It flowed upon itself. And all the other rivers, the sources - and even the sea - were born from his strong current. He himself was born from the loving union of Gaia (Tellus), the Earth, and Uranus (Caelus), the Sky. He was one of the Titans: his name was Ocean (in Greek: Okeanós, a word related to oka: swift). (The Creation of all Waters, Greek myth) At the time of the Delphic oracles, the Greek Sibyl (2nd century BC) also spoke of this, maintaining: "The Most High King, who brought the whole world into existence, saying: "Let it be," and it was. For the earth [was] established, making it round upon Tartarus…” (Sibylline Oracles, Book I, verse 10)

Consequently, the ancients knew more than we imagine, but apparently there have been appearances and disappearances of civilizations throughout human history, and the same with respect to knowledge (which explains the “Artifacts Out of Their Time,” which call into question evolutionary theories): “What has been? It is what will be. What has been done? It is what will be done; and there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which it can be said, ‘Behold, this is new’? It was in the ages before us; there is no memory of what preceded it…” (Ecclesiastes 1:9-11, 5th-10th century BC) The size of the Earth’s sphere was established in the 3rd century BC thanks to the ingenuity of Eratosthenes of Cyrene. He had a very broad personality: philosopher, poet, astronomer, grammarian, mathematician, geographer, and even athlete. Eratosthenes became director of the Library of Alexandria, the main center of knowledge in the ancient world. There, he read one day in a papyrus that at a place on the border of Egypt and Nubia, called Syena, near the present-day city of Aswan, something curious was happening: In Syena, at noon on June 21, objects under the sun cast no shadows. On that day, the longest day of the year (or summer solstice), the sun could be seen reflected in the bottom of a well; it was directly overhead. He then deduced that the Earth's surface was curved.

Persians

Looking at other examples from other peoples, such as the Persians, we find references to the Avesta—the sacred text of Mazdaism—attributed to the Persian prophet Zoroaster. Some have claimed that the book sets forth the worldview that supports the idea of ​​a flat Earth, but this interpretation is incorrect. One example is Fargard 19, which says: "To keep them on this Earth, which is vast, round, difficult to traverse..." (19th Fargard). The Avesta speaks of "seven keshvars," which has been assumed to refer to seven ziggurats (stepped pyramids) one above the other as a way of referring to the distribution of the world. What is this conjecture based on? The text is referring to seven regions of our planet, such as the seven continents and/or seven representative seas, and has nothing to do with the idea of ​​a flat Earth. At best, it would be a belief similar to the Vedic (Indian) belief, which speaks of 7 spheres, which are the 7 enveloping dimensions of the Earth, and 7 planets of the solar system, thus considering 7 as a kind of "master number" through which the Creator designed the universe. The Vedas and other cultures also speak of 7 levels of consciousness and 7 chakras, analogous to 7 musical octaves, 7 days of the week, or 7 colors of the visible light spectrum.

Hebrews

"At his wrath the world trembles, and at his anger the camps are shaken, and the foundations are shaken for fear of him, and at his warning Araboth trembles." (Hebrew Book of Enoch, chapter 22:2). It is important to know that the Romans commonly used the Latin term "orbis," which encompasses the idea of ​​the world as a sphere or a perfect circle. Even biblical translators such as Jerome of Stridon (4th century AD) used it as an equivalent to the Hebrew word "Tebel" (world). They used this distinction because the word "world" comes from the Latin "Mundus" or "Mundi," which referred to the universe, and is, in fact, the equivalent of the Greek "Kosmou" (cosmos), which is usually translated in the Bible as "world." Clearly, "orb-tebel" is something different from "universe-cosmos," and the word "world" causes serious confusion regarding these distinct concepts. It should be added that in the Hebrew language, there are aspects such as "Aretz" (earth) and "Olam" (world) that are not limited to planet Earth. "Aretz" would define the physical worlds, and "Olam" would identify the projection of the universe, that is, the illusory appearance of matter. Now, it was not possible for the ancients to perceive the Earth as a mere linear plain, given that they themselves were experts in astronomy, and consequently knew about the precession of the equinoxes (the Earth's oscillation within its rotational and orbital movements), the lunar phases (which stem from the semicircular shadow cast by the Earth on the Moon, a point already emphasized by Aristotle), the constellations of the southern hemisphere, and the accounts of navigators (none of whom reported seeing the end of the world: a precipice or an insurmountable wall). Some opponents of the Bible attempt to use verses taken out of context and/or mistranslated and/or misinterpreted to argue that the Hebrew people of the past believed that the sky was a vault covering the supposedly flat Earth (specifically, plate-shaped, according to some, or square, according to others). These conclusions are also unfounded, since the word "vault" does not appear in the Bible and is only translated by some publishers to refer to Hebrew words such as Rakia ('emptiness' in the sense of emptiness or absence of objects), which others translate as firmament or expanse. In the Book of Enoch, the word "rakia" is used to refer to the orbits of the planets, and most passages from the Tanak (Old Testament) use it to refer to the atmosphere. Even so, it is common to translate "rakia" as "sky."

“I have traversed the roundness of the heavens alone, and walked through the depths of the deep.” (Sirach 24:5) The book of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus, is another Israelite text that provides examples of how the atmosphere was understood as circular, not domed (an unscientific idea that violates every law of physics, as well as the presumption of a flat Earth). Some people speculate by forcing a conjecture that it was simply a circle of how the sky would appear across the horizon, but this neither supports nor denies the belief in a spherical Earth, since at worst it would merely be speaking of what the viewer observes of the sky (it does not imply that it is describing a worldview). But where are those abysses so repeatedly mentioned and described as circular? In addition, the first book of Moses (Genesis)—written approximately 3,400 years ago—matches the Book of Enoch (whose original source could be more than 4,400 years old) and the revelations of Ezra and Baruch (4th-6th centuries BC), explaining how the solar system and the Earth were created, giving details that only modern science has been uncovering. It would be very strange to find any Hebrew quotation that maintains that the Earth was flat… “He brought forth from the ends of the world the one who smites terribly; he decreed war against Jerusalem and its land.” (Psalm of Solomon 8:15)

One such example is found in the books of the prophets of Israel: “He sits above the circle of the earth, its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; he stretches out the heavens like a curtain, he spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.” (Isa. 40:22. 8th century BC. Reina Valera translation). It does not say ‘plain’. Although it is usually translated as ‘circle’, the Hebrew word ‘Jug’ encompasses the idea of ​​circumference, roundness or sphericity. Even the Greek and Latin translations use words related to ‘circle’ or ‘circumference’. Another case, described by King Solomon: “When he established the heavens, I was there; When he set a circle on the face of the deep…” (Prov. 8:27, Hebrew text) Another case also indicates that “He bounded the circle on the face of the waters, to the uttermost part of the light with darkness.” (Job 26:10, Hebrew text) Note that the word ‘Teklah’, which is translated as ‘extreme’ or ‘limit’, also forms the word ‘Tekelet’ (celestial, sky blue). This suggests an alternative translation, such as "he determined [as] a roundness in relation to the surface of the water, even to the blue [sky-blue] light with the darkness."

Looking at more biblical episodes, we can see that Solomon sent ships to the land of Ophir, and, according to all research on this famous port, it could not have been in the Mediterranean, much less in the northern regions. Theories about Ophir's location range from Peru, India, South Africa, Yemen, Ethiopia, or Afghanistan. In any case, the maritime route of the ships must have passed through the Southern Hemisphere 3,000 years ago, and since navigators guided themselves at night by the constellations, it was evident that the crossing through South Africa presented a completely different sky than that known in the Northern Hemisphere. Consequently, these navigators knew that the sky was different in the south of the Earth and would not have assumed, either through calculations or their voyages, that the Earth was flat. Their navigational charts would have had to consider that miles farther south, constellations appeared that hadn't existed days before, most of which they had never seen in the Northern Hemisphere, and that refutes the flat-Earth theory. Ptolemy already debunked all this speculation by reinforcing the understanding of astronomical motion.

This is reminiscent of Job—an Idumean sage possibly predating Moses—who spoke extensively about the constellations, and of certain "far places of the south" (Job 9:9), regarding the positions of those constellations. But what would the Aborigines of Australia or the people of Chile think about the flat-Earth theory? Or what would the Chinese assume, given that evidence of a pre-Columbian Chinese presence has been found in many parts of the Americas, such as California? The map presumed to explain the flat Earth hypothesis is mathematically incorrect compared to the routes and maps possessed by navigators, and is, however, an invented model, since it does not originate from ancient drawings or carvings. In places like Ecuador, carved stones at least 17,000 years old have been found. These are basically stone world maps, almost resembling a globe, even marking the equator.

Jesus and the Round Earth

The principle of a round Earth was shared by the early Christians: "The seven churches that are now spread throughout the world..." (Testament of John). Among the many arguments that support the ancients' knowledge of the sphericity of the globe, there are supernatural testimonies that recount journeys outside the Earth, which include empirical descriptions: "And Jesus and his disciples were in the regions of the air, on the paths of the middle, which is above the sphere." (Gospel of Truth 51:28). There are also stories, such as that of Yeshua (Jesus) himself, that speak extensively about celestial bodies and the forces that govern those worlds: "And he bound them in the regions of the air where we are now, above the sphere." (54:2). There is also a historical episode from the life of the master, which breaks certain molds. This is about the temptation in the desert, from which the words of the event are even taken to assume that the Jews thought the earth was completely flat: "Again, the devil took him up to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory..." (Matthew 4:8, NIV)

Did Satan show Yeshua (Jesus) all the kingdoms of the Earth from a mountain? That's impossible, because not even an eagle can have eyesight sharp enough to see "all the kingdoms of the Earth" from above. And that's assuming a 100% clear sky, without a single particle in the air that, combined with the millions of other particles, would make a panoramic view impossible. Not even from Mount Everest could an eagle with binoculars see 1,000 km away. If anyone believes that everything discussed in the Bible and history at the "theophanic" level was an invention, of course, there are a thousand and one things to refute. For those who understand that we are not dealing with human inventions, it is then clear that the description cannot be referring to a mountain on Earth, or simply something literal. The text doesn't even say "earth" (in Greek, "Gii"), but rather "world" (in Greek, "kosmou").

Consequently, let's assume that the devil showed Yeshua all the realms of the cosmos, and he did so in some way, which is enough to understand as an idea (Satan symbolizes the ego, and the vision of things can be mental, not physical). Furthermore, if we are seeking coherence in something supernatural, how is it supposed that Satan took Yeshua to the pinnacle of the Temple, whose height was 13.5 meters, and whose structure did not include stairs to climb to the roof?: "Then the devil took him to the holy city and set him on a pinnacle of the temple. And he said to him, 'If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down.' For it is written: 'He will give his angels charge over you, and they will bear you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.' Jesus said to him, 'It is also written: 'You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.'" (Matt. 4:5-7, ESV) What do you mean, "He set him"? Did he fly him?

The 4 Corners and Foundations

It has also been interpreted that the ancients viewed the Earth as a plain supported by 4 points, which is a misperception of "the four corners of the earth" (7th Fargard, Zoroastrian Avesta). For the sages, the number '4' represented support or sustenance, and therefore "balance." The Hebrews also spoke of "the four corners of the earth" (Isa. 11:12, ESV), as did the prophet Enoch thousands of years earlier. But what were those “ends” of the Earth? The Bible itself answers the question: “…then he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven.” (Mark 13:27, ESV) This was a way of referring to the cardinal points. Similarly, with regard to Job 26:7, it is clear that people have always been able to distinguish the cardinal directions: “He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing.” (Job 26:7, ESV) North over empty space? The terrestrial north is not only derived from the Earth’s mysterious magnetic field, but from a “stellar north,” which seems to have been well known to people in ancient times. The references to the four corners of the sky and the earth were related to the constellations, and their north “over the void” is the trajectory of our solar system towards the circumpolar constellations of Lyra and Draco.

Consequently, it can be said that many of the modern astronomical discoveries were already known in the past, and even went further, delving into science about the existence of other dimensions or planes (the 'loka' and 'talas' of Hinduism). This is what many could have referred to with Hades; a world in another dimension or plane beneath the Earth, and which would follow the spherical pattern: "Now the pit of the world is a roundness like a sphere, […] the higher you climb within it to look down, from there you will not be able to see its bottom, […] whence its bottom or part, if a sphere has a bottom, the Greeks call Hades, from the Greek "idein" meaning "to see," because one cannot see the bottom of a sphere. Wherefore, sensible forms are also called "ideas" because they are visible concepts. Because they cannot be seen, because they are at the bottom of the sphere, the Greeks called Hades what we call Hell." (From Hermes to Asclepius, Verse 18. Corpus Hermeticum)

Consequently, on any subject one discusses, one will find that few actually read the ancient texts, and rather make assumptions based on the suppositions of others. So it would be unusual to find a true source that describes that for those people the Earth was flat, that it ended in a precipice, or that it was not round. And if we add to that the fact that the Bible itself speaks countless times of the "Tebel," which is not Earth but world, the appreciation of this truth becomes even more consistent. Most of the time it doesn't say "Earth" (in Hebrew, "Aretz"), but "world" (in Hebrew, "Tebel"). For us in the West and today, Earth and World are sometimes even synonymous, but in ancient Hebrew culture they were not the same. Tebel refers to created things, which can even encompass creation itself in the entire universe. It's up to each individual to interpret what he meant, but the fact that he didn't say "Aretz" means he wasn't referring to the Earth as a solid or dry surface. The description itself is also reminiscent of other ancient texts, such as those from Mesopotamia or the Celts, which say that at the origins of the world, the Earth was struck by another stellar body and shattered into pieces. Through the action of gravity, it reunited and formed into a spherical shape. Through other means, and I suppose without knowing these sources, there are geologists and scientists from other fields who have postulated theories about an incident of this nature before the Cambrian.

The Planets

Besides the fact that the Earth wasn't understood as flat, and that the idea of ​​the world wasn't either, the same can be said of their view of the other planets, which they knew how to differentiate from the rest of the stars, even though they were mere dots in the celestial landscape. The ancients knew that the Earth was just one sphere, part of a group of 7 to 9 that revolved around the Sun: “There are nine worlds…” (Emerald Tablets of Thoth, Tablet IX) It was not until Johannes Kepler that the ideas of planetary rotations and translations were explored in depth, and even with Galileo and Copernicus new claims came to the fore that the planets were not stars, and that they revolved around stars: “…the words “Sun”, “Moon”, etc., which are designated as gods, are used here to mean mere spheres of light.” (Brahmasutras 1.3.32, Vedic texts) And he adds: “Descending from the sphere of the Moon, the soul becomes like the ether…” It is ironic that there was such extensive knowledge about the stars in the past, and the further back we go, the greater it seems. This is the case of the prophet Enoch, an antediluvian character who describes the transit of the Sun, the phases of the Moon, the order of the planets in the solar system, and other things that were impossible for his time, unless he had been taken in a spaceship to see it, or that at that time there remained vestiges of an advanced science and cultures that later dwindled until they disappeared.

From Yeshua (Jesus) himself there are other statements about the movements of celestial bodies that were not possible to know at that time, but if we go back to the 10th century BC, to the time of King Shlomo (Solomon), we find that his wisdom was really what was said about it, and the Templars discovered in his tomb texts where he speaks of the Sun, the Earth, the Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn, and the relationship of these with plants, the constellations of the zodiac, stones, the cardinal points, the seasons, animals, the elements and with what we could define as "beings from another dimension" or another "essence". But knowledge was not limited to the planets but to the constellations of the zodiac, which were the same for all cultures, varying only in certain appreciations. That is, they knew about the ecliptic's journey and the relationship of the stars that make up these bodies with the Sun and Earth, and about the sphericity of our orb.

But returning to the planetary aspect, many of the modern theories fall under their own weight when compared to all these facts, and once again make it clear that the history told is retouched and modified to present a false account of events and human civilization. There are cases, such as Tiawanaco (in Bolivia), where a construction of unknown origin, but clearly pre-Columbian, was built not only in relation to the solstices, but also in relation to Venus; or in Mali (in West Africa), where the Dogon tribe possesses knowledge and engravings of the sky, especially of the star Sirius, which their ancestors already knew was a triple system (something that wasn't discovered until 1995, and Sirius was only postulated to be a double system in 1844). But let us continue with the arguments that make clear the understanding of all these peoples about the sky before Kepler: «The Sky was seen in seven circles, and the gods were shown in the form of stars with all their constellations [...] it was organized with the gods who were in it; and the orb, at its periphery, revolved in the air, guided in its circular course by the divine spirit.» (Treatise XVII, verse 2. Corpus Hermeticum) Hermes comments previously: «Around the Sun gravitate the eight spheres that depend on it: one of the fixed stars, seven of the wandering stars, and of these one revolves around the Earth.» (Treatise XV, Corpus Hermeticum)

One of the cases that most impressed researchers was the Dendera zodiac (dated by some only to 50 BC, while by others to 2500 BC), in which the sky is seen in a "circular" shape, supported by four deities at four corners, representing the 12 zodiacal houses, the typical 36 decans of Egyptian astronomy (representing first-magnitude stars), Ptolemy's 48 constellations, the cardinal points, the implication of the precession of the equinoxes, data on eclipses, and, of course, the five planets visible from Earth. When Enoch, thousands of years ago, on his travels through the heavens (outer space) – whether he was carried by angels or aliens is another point of discussion – described the planets of the solar system and their orbits, he narrated: “And on the fourth day I ordered the great luminaries to be in the circles of the Heavens. In the first circle, the highest, I placed the kochab Shabbetai (Saturn), in the second above I placed Noga (Venus), in the third Maedim (Mars), in the fourth Shemesh (the Sun), in the fifth Tzedek (Jupiter), in the sixth Kokeb (Mercury), in the seventh Yareach (the Moon); and in [them] the small kochab, beautiful and brilliant, those flying ones, the lesser ones.” (2 Enoch 30:3-4. Compared with the Dead Sea Scrolls sources)

Not only does it identify these planets but also their small ‘kojab’ (satellites, moons), which were not officially known until the 17th century (from 1610, when Galileo observed the large moons of Jupiter, followed by Huygens, who did the same from 1655 with the larger ones of Saturn). Moreover, the verse from the second book of Enoch even adds that “the Sun must go through the whole circle [of the constellations] of the zodiac” (verse 6), something that was supposedly impossible to know at that time. But in addition, with respect to these spatial bodies, it adds that they follow the “law of their hours according to their rotation,” making a comment of such magnitude even before Aristarchus (2nd century BC). According to the Qumran scrolls, in chap. 32, lines 24-25, Enoch defines these bodies as "seven circles," and their visual appearance (in an age without telescopes) "forms something similar to crystal, both wet and dry, that is, glass, ice..." And, as in other passages, he even adds that these planets, like Earth, also possess "the other elements." Interesting, considering that without the invention of the spectroscope in 1859, the composition of the planets (which, moreover, had not been distinguished from the stars—except in their motion—until a few centuries earlier) would not have been known.

In passing, I mention that Enoch was also shown the planetary orbits (each on its own distinct scale), and that these planets were between Earth and the other bodies of the ecliptic: "the 12 constellations of the circle of the firmament, which are above the Seventh Heaven. And I myself showed to each one [was] his way, the seven kohabim, each in her heaven, so that they would advance. (1 Enoch 21:7) Another manuscript, also by the aforementioned Solomon, comments on certain prophets who were taken from the Earth alive: "...they return to earth after traveling through all the spheres of our solar system. That is why the return of Enoch and Elijah will precede the second coming of Jesus." (Eliphas Levi. The Spirits - Major Keys and Clavicles of Solomon,) How is it that Solomon speaks of Jesus, if his birth was almost 900 years away? This is another topic for discussion, but the point is that the modern model of thought that underestimates the ancients when it suits, and admires them when it suits, only partly because of an interest in strengthening an accepted paradigm. On one occasion, the early Christians recount: "And Jesus had not yet announced to his disciples all the emanation from all the regions of the great invisible, […] and his creations, and his vivification, and his archons, and his angels, and his archangels, and his deans, and his satellites, and all the dwellings of his spheres." (Gospel of Truth 1:5)

This text was saved from the destruction decreed by Theodosius I at the First Council of Constantinople (381 AD), and with it there are at least 45 others, among which is an unnamed one that is another of those that tells how the Earth and the solar system were formed: "After Justice created the beautiful paradise beyond the sphere of the moon and the sphere of the sun, the land of pleasure that is in the east, in the rocks." (On the Origin of the World) The word 'Justice' in Hebrew is 'Tzedek', which is the Hebrew name for the planet Jupiter. Speaking about the movement of the bodies of the solar system, the above text, also collected by Valentinus, reads: “And Jesus said to his disciples: When the sphere turns and is changed, so that Cronus and Ar[...]es come to the virgin of light, and Zeus and Aphrodite come to the virgin, turning in their orbits…” (Gospel of Truth 63:5) Cronus is the Roman name for Saturn, Ares is the Roman name for Mars, Zeus is the Roman name for Jupiter. He also speaks of Venus: “…the sphere that is called Aphrodite” (54:14). Aphrodite is the Greek name for the Roman goddess ‘Venus’. He even mentions Mercury: “And these five archons are called thus in the world: the first, Cronus; the second, Ar[i]es; the third, Hermes; the fourth, Aphrodite, and the fifth, God.” (52:9) By saying ‘God’, the translator is referring to ‘Theos’ in Greek, which was the way of calling Zeus (Jupiter). In fact, the word ‘God’ was originally an alternative way of calling Zeus.

The Master Yeshua (Jesus) had very keen knowledge of the subject, which at that time only the wisest, most studied, and knowledgeable were familiar with: “Now there was also a wise man there, skilled in astronomy. And he asked Jesus: Do you have any knowledge of astronomy, my son? And Jesus answered him, explaining to him the number of the spheres and the celestial bodies, with their natures, their virtues, their oppositions, their combinations by three, four, and six, their ascensions and regressions, their positions in minutes and seconds, and other things that go beyond the limits of a creature’s reason.” (Arabic Gospel of Infancy 51:1-2. Ambrosiana Library, Italy) Whatever text is collected, it will shed light on the perception of the peoples who have preceded us as something that could only come from an advanced source: “…how can you understand the celestial circuits?” (Testament of Job 9:23) The books of the Bible deal with many topics related to the stars, as well as constellations such as the Pleiades, Orion, the zodiac, and other Ptolemaic constellations such as the Bear, as well as important stars, namely Arcturus, or planets such as Venus. If the 12 constellations of the zodiac are distinguished from the 48 described by Ptolemy, it is then that we know of the ecliptic alone, which is the journey of the sun through these constellations. "...I saw the spirits that revolve and guide the sun and the stars in their orbits" (1 Enoch 18:4).

Zoroaster wrote: "Your deceptions are evident, by which you are known on the sevenfold Earth." (Yasna XXXII, Avesta) Another important case of bringing to the fore is from the Celtic records: “Heaven and earth and all the spheres of infinite space are filled with His Spirit.” (Kolbrin, Hymn from the Book of Songs). This text adds about God, who is “The Maker of all that exists in all the spheres above and below…” (Sunset Hymn). No spatial body is defined in any source as “plate” or “flat,” but all in creation are spherical, including the Earth (because only rocks that lack the geology that our orb does lie inert in space). The Vedas, in India, also dealt with these themes: “…he tears the lights of day and night from their spheres in the blue sky.” (Ramayana, 3rd century BC) The oracles of Delphi, the Eleusinian mysteries, the cult of Mithras... wherever you look, you will never see ideas that support arguments that make those peoples appear like troglodytes: "...the smiling spheres of the zodiacal vault, Aries, Taurus, Gemini, and as many stars as Rulers [of] hours with them in the sky..." (Sibylline Oracles. Book XIII, Verse 90)

Journey of the Solar System

As we have read, another recurring argument about the ancients is that they thought the sky was a vault, and that celestial bodies were those that moved around the Earth (as flat-earthers assume). The very idea of ​​a static world is unscientific, as they already knew that the entire globe and the solar system moved, and they did so “northward,” that is, in the direction of the polar constellations: “He stretches out the north over empty space, He hangs the earth on nothing.” (Job 26:7) It must be remembered that people have always been able to distinguish cardinal directions. The Hebrews called them “winds of the earth” or “angles of the earth.” These are associated with the “angles of the sky” based on the celestial bodies. The reference for this is the ecliptic, which not only follows the Earth and other planets in relation to the sun, but is also the trajectory of the sun in relation to the constellations of the zodiac.

The Hebrew text is transcribed as: “Natah tzafon al-tahu…” The word “Natah” refers to settling or unfolding. The 'Tahu' or 'Tohu' is the idea of ​​nothingness, of emptiness or apparent emptiness. It's an allusion to outer space. In other words, the northern orientation is lost in immensity. But this could also be said about the south or any other cardinal orientation. The reason is that the solar system is a phalanx system. It doesn't correspond to the graphic models that have long been represented. More and more mathematical and astronomical models agree with this mechanism of the system, where the sun would actually travel behind the North Star and its group, and the rest of its neighbors (the planets of this system) would follow it, but in a whirlpool-like manner. This means that the system moves in a serpentine fashion, surpassing the ecliptic axis of the Milky Way up and down, while simultaneously circling it following the North Star.

Current computer models are beginning to structure these new discoveries, since they are imperceptible to the eye and can only be visualized by calculating the thousands of years of each circuit. However, our system's journey is north of our Earth's and Sun's equator, and this always makes "Sagittarius A" (the center of the Milky Way is on the horizon, never toward our polar north) a lateral reference. In other words, we travel toward the apparent void, as we spin within circuits within other circuits (cycles) like a whirlpool, as if wanting to be repelled outward from the galaxy, but at the same time attracted by other physical forces (and if the Earth were a non-spherical rock, it would have disintegrated). And since all systems move—like the galaxy itself, taking as a reference point a static theoretical location in the vacuum of the universe—no body stays in the same place, but continues to shift. Consequently, the Earth moves relative to the Sun, the Sun relative to the constellations of the zodiac, the constellations of the zodiac relative to another group of systems, and these relative to the galaxy. But the Milky Way itself moves relative to a local group, and that local group also relative to Laniakea, and Laniakea relative to the Virgo supercluster of galaxies, and so on.

The idea that the solar system traveled through the galaxy was already known—although it was said to have been "discovered" centuries ago—but even more so, the heliocentric idea of ​​orbits was also known, and not only as a concept of a fixed plane, but as a vortex, where the system would be traveling as if propelled toward the North Star at 70,000 km/h, taking 226 million years to revolve around the galactic center. Moreover, to be precise, the movement would not be heliocentric but helical, an idea that was recently proposed by the scientist P. Keshava Bhat (2010), although it already appears well described in texts such as the Oahspe (1882). There are other examples of how the planetary sphere is magnetically and energetically connected to 4 cardinal points and 4 lateral points (the angles of the sky and those of the earth): «…he saw the heavens and the eight cardinal points, he saw the mountains and the continents, he saw the seven oceans that surround the Earth, he saw all the countries, the Lord of the winds and the celestial worlds…) (Sriman Bhagavatam. Cap. 158, Vedic texts).

Astronomers

There is much more to say on this topic, but it is beyond the scope of the opinions held by people of the past regarding the aforementioned matter. Another series of articles would be necessary just to move this debate into a strictly scientific realm, but suffice it to use astrophysics to argue that a flat Earth is an unscientific argument. Why? Because it would be the only celestial body that would disobey all astrophysical laws, starting with the models of rotation, interplanetary gravitational attraction, movements of tectonic layers (which includes volcanic processes), the force of planetary gravity, the constitution of the atmosphere, lunar shadows, color effects of the moon, formation of oceans, ocean currents, atmospheric winds, seasons, radio connections, satellite interconnections and transmissions, airplane flight distances, the effect of the northern lights, the effect of the terrestrial electromagnetic field, the translation effects of all bodies in the solar system, the effect of precession of the equinoxes, the effects of the tide, the effects of curvature of the shadow on the surface between the northern hemisphere and the southern hemisphere, and, above all, that there is not a single testimony in the whole world that there is a geographical end somewhere on the planet, and, on the contrary, too many proofs The inescapable implications of Earth's sphericity, from aeronautics, stratospheric photography, and radar and navigation systems from both inside and outside the atmosphere.

As we can see, the most significant cultures have established that for them the Earth has been spherical. In the flat-Earth approach, essentially "God" created only the Earth. There was no universe, no galaxies, no stars, no planets, no comets, no asteroids. Without any scientific jargon, he simply formed a rock out of nothing, made it flat on top, poured water over it, and covered it with a glass dome, which he filled with air. It is clear that when one has not studied the advances of science, astronomy, navigation, and the laws of physics, this seems like a naive fad. On the contrary, having become seasoned with knowledge, we understand that this "religion" is a clear result of the ignorance and lack of culture of the society that gave rise to it. In addition to the examples already given, let's look at other cases:

1. That of the Ottoman admiral Piris Reis, who in 1513 copied an ancient map that covered much of the world, especially the Atlantic. Similar to other maps by Athanasius Kircher (1602-1680), this navigator had a map identical in size to the digital map used by military submarines, based on the spherical concept of the Earth.

2. It is well known that unless you have a system of 3D engravings or drawings, you cannot draw a sphere on a surface. It requires complete relief, and therefore, the idea that the Earth is a plate based on drawings is still ridiculous today. Even in a digital image, you cannot see a 3D volume except by assuming it is an optical effect, since this requires a three-dimensional hologram or a volumetric mold, as in the case of ancient Chinese engravings where the dragon is seen stepping on the planetary globe with one of its front paws.

3. As I mentioned when referring to the Bible, some flat-earthers violate the laws of physics by attempting to justify their beliefs with mistranslated or misinterpreted biblical allusions. This is how Genesis speaks of heaven, where in one case it mentions Shamayim and in another, Rakia. Shamayim is the highest concept of heaven, from the dimensional to the cosmic—and even the orbital—sense, while Rakia is the most interior, as is the case with a plane of reality or the atmosphere itself.

4. Both navigators and pilots must reconfigure, either digitally or manually, their route trajectory, because they are not traveling in a straight line but rather gaining more kilometers by ascending the curvature. All of us who have been in the navy, and those who are pilots (like my father was), know this.

5. I will add here the fact of optical effects, which are usually the argument most used by flat-earthers. We all know that "appearances are always deceiving," and this is true when it comes to visual effects. Other times, the error borders on naivety or mockery, as in the case of photos or videos taken from inside an airplane, showing the sun on one side and another "sun" on the other, which is, in reality, a reflection of the same image from the airplane window.

6. Flat-Earthers say that if the Earth were rolling, we would be thrown into space, or that any flying device would simply move away on its own as it left the ground. This phenomenon stems from the speed of rotation, which is actually so slow, in terms of one rotation in 24 hours, that we don't notice it. Even so, if this explanation weren't convincing enough, the obvious one stems from the force of gravity. What's more, the same effect is observed inside a pressurized airplane, where it maneuvers without you noticing, and accelerates and decelerates at certain rates that, if constant and progressive, become imperceptible.

7. The elementary particles called Higgs bosons, of the subatomic order of photons, were first postulated in 1964, and are part of the order of cosmic and matter aspects that have been studied in terms of space. Consider that for flat-Earthers, nothing exists outside the atmosphere, and all astronomical information is false and comes from NASA (although NASA was only created in 1958).

8. The case of the magnetosphere is also another problem in flat-Earth doctrine. The American satellite Explorer I discovered it in 1958, and from it also came knowledge of the Van Allen belts. This structure, similar to the energy mechanics of Tesla coils, explains how the Earth protects itself from solar radiation.

9. This brings us to the concept of auroras. While flat-Earthers might assume that the aurora borealis is an effect unrelated to the overload of subatomic particles and charges in the magnetosphere, the same does not apply to the aurora australis, since it would not be located in one point in the sky but all around the world, for which flat-Earthers would have to invent another, as usual, unscientific reasoning.

10. Another example is the discovery of black holes, popularized in 1970 by Stephen Hawking, a studied aspect of deep space. It is important to understand that, regardless of whether NASA lies about many things, it is not the only space agency, and not all space studies are conducted by aerospace agencies. Even assuming that its satellites do not see what they show, there are radio telescopes in many countries around the world observing the sky, and great scientific authorities with advanced technology are evaluating an indisputable exterior that lies beyond the atmosphere. This is a fascination that has existed for thousands of years.

11. Consider the discovery of the cosmic constant, or dark energy, proposed by Albert Einstein, the discovery of dark matter by Fritz Zwicky in 1933, or the discovery of cosmic radiation by Victor Franz Hess in 1911. These postulates speak of the energy present in everything, and that everything, speaking in terms of a universe 21 billion light-years across, not this planet.

12. Not far from this is the fact that beneath the magnetosphere are more atmospheric layers that are not justified by flat-Earth theory, which holds that there is no ozone but rather a glass dome. Thus, the stratosphere would not exist, nor would it have the levels of atmospheric pressure and gas that scientists have explained.

13. Similarly, the Big Bang argument, which took shape in 1927, has been the subject of multiple computational and mathematical analyses since then as an explanation for the origin of the universe. This proposes what computational mathematical models now follow regarding the motion of the universe, not only through the sequences of motion of galaxies, but also through the cosmic constant. This goes hand in hand with the galactic theory proposed by Immanuel Kant in 1755.

14. The reasoning that the sun was just another star among billions of others in space was first recognized by Giordano Bruno in the 1600s, the kind of ideas that led him to be burned at the stake.

15. Likewise, from the perspective of a sun within the atmosphere, the inconsistencies are numerous. According to flat-earthers, the theory of gravity is incorrect. However, if stars don't attract each other, what moves the sun and moon? How do they not crash into the ground, or if they float, do they not continue to rise?

16. Following this same line, the sun remains stable because, despite its high temperatures, it is offset by the low temperatures of space. This star would heat the Earth thanks to solar radiation and regularly emits coronae, which, if within the atmosphere, would destroy all life. This is evident, even if we accept the flat-earthers' reasoning that the sun is actually very small.

17. From a flat-earther perspective, the sun's cycles of motion have no scientific explanation. The sun would revolve around the surface every 24 hours, without an engine to move it, anything to keep it at that altitude, and without a single piece of evidence of its close location (in fact, the sun disappears over the horizon, and so does the moon often; do they disappear into another dimension?). The same would apply to the moon.

18. The phases of the moon are a stumbling block for flat-earthers, since the semicircular part that casts its shadows comes from the back of the Earth's sphere. In other words, the phases of the Moon are due to the Earth eclipsing it when the sun is behind the Earth, and the semicircular bottom of the Earth is visible. And to that, we can add that the Moon always shows exactly the same face, no matter where you are on the planet. There is no variation in this phenomenon, which completely rules out the possibility of the Moon being close, and it can only be possible if the Moon is outside of Earth and thousands of kilometers away.

19. The case of the red Moon, or other lunar hue effects, are not due to clouds, but rather because the sunlight reflected by the Moon reaches the atmosphere and is deflected, thus losing its energy charge, and appearing red to us.

20. Since the gravity of massive bodies affects others, we would have to assume that the movement and change of the tides are not due to the influence of the Moon.

21. Using the same example, the moon's curious influence on menstrual cycles could not be justified based on any aspect related to gravity.

22. Although Nicolaus Copernicus also confronted the Catholic Church by proposing the heliocentric theory, rather than the geocentric one, he was not the only one to speak of spatial bodies orbiting gravitationally around others. Galileo Galilei, famous for his telescope and for being able to see Jupiter's four main moons in 1610, soon saw that they were moving around him. Galileo himself later discovered Saturn's rings in 1612.

23. Galileo's work was greatly complemented by the observations of Percival Lowell and Giovani Schiaparelli, who made the canals of Mars famous in 1902.

24. Another aspect of the sun is that it heats the Earth in a familiar way, in the 24-hour daily and annual cycles, with the four seasons and the shifting movement of the polar axis throughout the year, depending on the position: whether you are in the northern or southern hemisphere. For this reason, the Earth maintains geothermal heat that causes the sublimation of water particles in the ocean, producing clouds and lending itself to the hydrological cycle that brings rain to the planet.

25. It is due to solar radiation and geothermal energy that changes in atmospheric and magma pressure, as well as air and ocean currents, occur. The movement of tectonic plates, continental plates, and many earthquakes are due to this phenomenon.

26. This geothermal effect keeps our globe stable at a suitable temperature, preventing us from freezing when the sun is not present.

27. The distance from the sun is another important aspect to consider, because its direct rays would make it unbearable to look outside, and its high temperatures would burn us. However, flat-earthers will argue that this doesn't happen because the sun isn't actually that bright or that hot, and doesn't emit solar flares, solar corona, or solar wind, but that it's all lies of science.

28. Considering that flat-earthers assume there are no planets and that stars are lights that shine in that dome. They don't explain how that dome and those little dots were formed, and how they keep shining. It's also worth noting that if it were a dome where those fixed little lights were painted, the movement of the precession of the equinoxes, which places the star map in a different position each night, would suggest that it's a painting that "someone" is constantly moving, with no scientific explanation.

29. Following this, seeing quasars, galaxies, supernovae, stars and planets, comets, moons, and asteroids through a telescope would be part of an art that someone is directing, since the planets of the solar system move along an ecliptic, or orbit around the sun, and therefore are seen moving across the sky, unlike the stars. 30. In terms of flat-Earthism, comets would be a hoax, even though they are a phenomenon that has been observed for millennia. If it were something within the atmosphere, what moves it, how is it sustained, where does it come from, and where does it end up? The comet is visible, in fact, because it is invisible until it approaches the solar system, as sunlight makes it visible. Furthermore, the tail is precisely an effect where the heat of the sun melts the icy surface, leaving a trail.

31. Thanks to astronomy, the planet Uranus was discovered in 1781, Neptune in 1846, and Pluto in 1930, all of which existed before NASA (and flat-Earthers maintain that all images of space are digital creations created by NASA, although this type of montage, like Photoshop, only became popular in 1988).

32. Another dilemma is the seasons. Flat-Earthers force this belief by assuming that the sun adjusts its motion pattern so that the climate varies considerably, to the point of producing seasons. The fact that the sun is within the atmosphere would only allow for the existence of one climate.

33. Let's add that if the sun were within the atmosphere, it would never be nighttime, much less if the Earth were flat, since it would never disappear over the horizon. We might have sunsets and sunrises lasting many hours, but never a night, nor would we be able to see the black sky or the stars. Furthermore, the optical effect of daytime is due to the sun's photonic light striking atmospheric particles, creating a "haze effect," and thus, the entire sky is illuminated. Thus, even if the mini-sun were thousands of kilometers away, not only would there be no darkness, but the sky would still be illuminated.

34. Flat-Earthers offer no explanation for how meteorites and asteroids fall to the surface. Where do they come from? Likewise, they are forced to deny the existence of dinosaurs (despite the thousands and thousands of fossils that exist around the world and fill museums), since it could not be said that an asteroid exterminated these creatures.

35. In the field of telecommunications, it is evident that everything from radio to mobile telephony works by transmitting and receiving waves. A dome-shaped atmosphere model is useless for direct, or even indirect, wave transmission, but when it comes to satellite communication, telephone repeaters beam the signal to orbiting satellites that triangulate the signals. If these satellites are within the atmosphere, they do not take advantage of the deadlock between centrifugal force and gravitational attraction to remain in the air forever. Instead, these thousands and thousands of satellites would require a flight system and fuel, and who will refuel and crew them?

36. And compasses? They would point toward the center of the Earth, according to flat-earthers, but why? They will say it's because of a large number of magnets in that region, but if the idea of ​​magnets is true, any area of ​​the world could cause interference with a compass at any moment. The most objective reasoning is Ampere's law, where the constant fluctuation of energy produces a field in space, and this generates electromagnetism. Therefore, on a sphere, it would enter through the South Pole and exit through the North Pole, but on a flat Earth, it would be impossible.

37. Considering that, according to flat-earthers, there is no South Pole, one could not speak of a "hole" in the ozone layer at the South Pole. The heat would not have pierced the atmosphere, so, according to them, there would also be no hole in the ozone layer.

38. If we wanted to be impertinent, we would say that for flat-earthers, the only valid time is the time of day and the moon, since they wouldn't believe in the existence of an annual cycle. Then, not only would they not believe in horoscopes, but also in birthdays. Or even speaking of the cardinal points, it would be comical to imagine north as the center of the Earth, south as everything around us, and east and west as inconsistent conjectures in the distance.

39. For lovers of the UFO phenomenon, or of the existence of extraterrestrial life, apart from the fact that flat-earthers would ignore this argument, they would deny all evidence of alien contact since the dawn of humanity.

40. But is NASA lying? Of course. Its operations actually revolve around the Blue Beam project. They save money by not sending people into space, but instead film with chroma key backgrounds and ropes, creating fake space montages. Since Apollo XI, moon landing scenes have been filmed in the Nevada desert, assisted by film director Stanley Kubrick. This was done separately from other missions that carried out secret operations on the Moon. According to naval intelligence, the Moon has had military bases since 1954, and so has Mars, since its actual arrival there in 1973.

41. How do you explain that the Earth spins and we don't fly away? If you carry a fish tank in a car traveling at 200 km/h—without sudden changes in speed or direction—the fish in the water won't perceive any movement. When you're in an airplane traveling at 1,000 km/h, you only notice the acceleration during takeoff and the reduction during descent and landing, but in mid-flight, you can get up from your seat and you won't be thrown into the back of the plane. Inside the atmosphere, you are in a medium dominated by atmospheric gases, and outside the Earth, there is a completely different medium that doesn't interfere with the interior.

42. According to flat-earthers, the sun is within the atmosphere, meaning that at sunset, the sun would be moving horizontally away, not "descending" toward the other side of the planet. However, when the sun is seen on the horizon, it is clearly seen descending below the horizon line, instead of reducing in size and remaining whole (completely round) in the distance.

43. María Belén Muñoz García (PhD in Geology, professor and researcher at the Faculty of Geological Sciences at the Complutense University of Madrid) recalls that "the higher we go, the further we can see. If the Earth were flat, this wouldn't be the case. On a flat Earth, you would have to see to the end of the Earth in any flat area, like the sea, for example. From Galicia, you should be able to see America with a sufficiently powerful telescope, but this is not possible due to the curvature of the Earth's surface. Since this has been known since ancient times, lighthouses are placed on top of a tower to be visible from a greater distance." And conversely, if you're in a port and see a ship arriving, you first see the tallest part of the ship appear, the mast; then the sails, and finally, the hull.

44. She also recalls that "sunrise and sunset times are different in every part of the world. [...] In relation to the previous point, the time the sun sets in each place also depends on the height from which you're looking at the horizon. Muslims have studied this very well. There are tables available online with sunset times in almost every part of the world so you know exactly when you can end your fast during Ramadan. If you look for these tables for Dubai, they warn you at the beginning that on the Burj Khalifa, which is 828 meters tall and the tallest building in the world, the sun sets three minutes later on the top floor than on the ground floor. This wouldn't happen on a flat planet either.>>

45. Also remember that "on a flat, non-rotating Earth, water should fall into the drain directly toward the center, equally everywhere, but that's not the case. When you empty a sink (preferably a large, round pool), a whirlpool forms due to the Coriolis effect, which can only be explained by the Earth's rotation. Flat-Earthers might say that a flat Earth could also rotate on its axis, and that this could generate a whirlpool like the one we see. The problem is that swimming pool whirlpools rotate in opposite directions in both hemispheres (as do depressions and anticyclones). For that, on a flat Earth, we would need two opposing rotational poles, each affecting half of the Earth."

46. Also remember that "in the northern hemisphere, the entire night sky rotates counterclockwise around the North Star, while in the southern hemisphere, everything revolves counterclockwise around the Southern Cross." For that to be the case on a flat Earth, you'd have to have two celestial spheres, one for each hemisphere, rotating in opposite directions.

47. And also remember that "the duration of long journeys is different depending on whether you're traveling eastward or westward." This fact has no explanation on a flat Earth. I'll give two very different examples, but both have to do with a spherical Earth rotating on its axis. A fairly common example is that the flight from Madrid to New York is longer than the one from New York to Madrid, and this is because the return flight is aided by the eastward-moving jet stream, which originates from the Earth's rotation. The other argument, somewhat more distant but very curious, is the circumnavigator's paradox. This paradox is that if you circumnavigate the globe, it doesn't take the same amount of time whether you're traveling westward or eastward. In this case, no matter how long it takes you to complete the entire circumnavigation, if you travel east you gain a day, like Phileas Fogg in Jules Verne's novel, while if you travel west you lose it, as happened to Elcano and his crew at the end of the first circumnavigation. This paradox is impossible to explain on a flat Earth where the sun rises at the same time for everyone and everyone shares the same calendar date.

Want to know more about flat earth believers questions? https://www.frederickguttmann.com/forum/geopolitica/flat-earthers-questions-and-answers