The earth is a spinning globe

I know how the heliocentric model lunar phases are suppose to work, I was indoctrinated too. It doesn't seem too fantastical for the sun too be exactly 400x bigger, yet 400x further away? Lunar eclipses are one of the stronger points for a spherical earth, but a selenelion lunar eclipse would be impossible on a ball. These occurrences have been recorded for centuries and happens when you are close enough to both the sun and moon on a flat earth. Both celestial bodies are above the horizon during a selenelion, making it impossible for the earth to be directly between the two, and more investigation is needed into the root cause of a lunar eclipse. I lean toward Rahu, but there is no empirical evidence exactly what it is. The heliocentric model doesn't give adequate excuse, calling for "refraction" to save the day. This at first seems a reasonable excuse for this happenning on a globe, but honestly, it just seems like more lies, how can refraction cause both the sun and moons appearance to be bent in opposite directions, AND causing the shadow to come in from the wrong angles...? If you look at the math for a globe earth, the sun is 4,000 miles below your feet during setting! Watch this video closely, and think, is the earth in between the sun and moon, or are they both at equal distances from the viewer, and close to the flat earth with an object somewhere overhead, or passing in front of the moon possibly close to it. Rahu https://youtu.be... Impossible selenelion https://youtu.be... They've been bouncing crap off the moon for long before the supposed moon landings, read about "operation moon bounce" in the 50's. This is just another he said proof, if I knew a few people that weren't government sponsored, that had this super powerful laser beam and all the necessary computers it took to measure this beam, this might be a little more believable, but since I can't go down to lasers r us and buy/rent this equipment, it can hardly be considered empirical evidence, and is therefore only as good as man's word. If they put a big reflector on the moon 60 years ago,it would be covered in a mountain of dust. Alternatively, I've stated that space could be a dense liquid, which would also reflect lasers. Science hinting at a liquid space http://www.ibtimes.co.uk... https://youtu.be... https://youtu.be... Moon is very dusty http://news.discovery.com... Errortosthanes "measured" the earth with two sticks, but The same exact results would be produced on a flat earth with a close sun. Again with the Greek philosophers, he also believed that since he saw (african) elephants in the west and (indian) elephants in the east, that he had circumnavigated the globe. Can't forget the knee-jerk response of ships going over the curvature, but if they had binoculars or telescopes then, this would have been ruled out long ago, or the invention would have been considered a magical device, being able to drag ships backwards over the curvature of the earth. Eratosthenes was wrong https://www.bungie.net... Ships "disappearing" over the curvature https://youtu.be... The Foucault pendulum is a parlor trick, it can be achieved with magnets. Even if it weren't magnets, how do we know the earth spins under a swinging ball? It doesn't move under hot air balloons, cannonballs, planes, etc. Felix Baumgartner, when skydiving from the stratosphere, landed in the opposite direction than he would have if the earth were spinning under him. Hot air balloons can't just float up and wait for their destination to come to them. Planes don't have to compensate for a 1,000mph moving runway, why should a swinging ball be disattached from the velcroed atmosphere? How do we know that it isn't the electromagnetism of the close, circuiting sun and moon that causes the ball to rotate? The allias effect disproved Any association the Foucault pendulum has with the rotation of the earth, along with Airys Failure, and the sagnac experiment, science cannot explain it, unless they can account for the theories I have brought forth, but they won't. They have mouths to feed. The Earth does not spin http://www.wildheretic.com... Same concept with the coriolis effect, the bullet travels a second or two, a few feet off the ground, and the earth supposedly moves under it, so it takes a split second for the earth to move under a bullet, and several minutes to move under Foucault... why not balloons, which fly hundreds of feet high, for hours, and can easily land in the same spot with no problems. And the coriolis effect does not cause the earths motion. The gyroscope should be useless in a spinning ball, because they stay at the same axis they started, in relation to space, even when sprinkled with magic gravity dust. Planes use these devices to stay level to the ground, but if they flew thousands of miles over a ball, the gyroscope would not produce the same false horizon from which it started, making it completely useless in a plane. Gyroscopes prove flat, motionless earth https://youtu.be... The last video is interesting, but then I've seen several videos and images where no curvature is present over much longer distances. This "curvature" can be explained as swells or drifts. https://en.m.wikipedia.org... This photo of the Chicago skyline from Michigan should not be possible. At this distance, only the tips of the 2 highest buildings would be visible, but you can see all of every building in the city. Before you take The bozo weatherman's excuse for this picture, where special circumstances must be present for this to happen, take a look at this time lapse video, from the same location. These videos are everywhere, and if the earth started to drop off at this distance, rising up from this ball would only cause the horizon to fall, and building you coul d see at long distances would be leaning away from you, but it doesn't. Even at 100,000 ft, the horizon stays flat and at eye-level. Note how two cameras are mounted, one fisheye cam and a standard lens. Chicago skyline picture. https://youtu.be... Time lapse https://youtu.be... Dog cam https://youtu.be...