200 Proofs that Eric Dubay is a liar and an idiot

"And finally, from Dr. Rowbotham, “Thus we see that this Newtonian philosophy is devoid of consistency; its details are the result of an entire violation of the laws of legitimate reasoning, and all its premises are assumed. It is, in fact, nothing more than assumption upon assumption, and the conclusions derived therefrom are willfully considered as things proved, and to be employed as truths to substantiate the first and fundamental assumptions. Such a juggle and jumble f of fancies and falsehoods extended and intensified as in theoretical astronomy is calculated to make the unprejudiced inquirer revolt with horror from the terrible conjuration which has been practised upon him; to sternly resolve to resist its further progress; to endeavour to over-throw the entire edifice, and to bury in its ruins the false honours which have been associated with its fabricators, and which still attach to its devotees. For the learning, the patience, the perseverance and devotion for which the...

"Quoting “Earth Not a Globe!” by Samuel Rowbotham, “It is found by observation that the stars come to the meridian about four minutes earlier every twenty-four hours than the sun, taking the solar time as the standard. This makes 120 minutes every thirty days, and twenty-four hours in the year. Hence all the constellations have passed before or in advance of the sun in that time. This is the simple fact as observed in nature, but the theory of rotundity and motion on axes and in an orbit has no place for it. Visible truth must be ignored, because this theory stands in the way, and prevents its votaries from understanding it”"  Rowbotham makes a statement with no evidence or explanation and Dubay just repeats it as usual I think what Rowbotham is saying is that the visible constellations at night vary.  If you are waiting for a constellation to come into view, the time that it will do so will vary by 4 minutes each night. This is simply another example of flat earthers be...

"From “Earth Not a Globe!” by Samuel Rowbotham, " Take two carefully-bored metallic tubes, not less than six feet in length, and place them one yard asunder, on the opposite sides of a wooden frame, or a solid block of wood or stone: so adjust them that their centres or axes of vision shall be perfectly parallel to each other. Now, direct them to the plane of some notable fixed star, a few seconds previous to its meridian time. Let an observer be stationed at each tube and the moment the star appears in the first tube let a loud knock or other signal be given, to be repeated by the observer at the second tube when he first sees the same star.  A distinct period of time will elapse between the signals given. The signals will follow each other in very rapid succession, but still, the time between is sufficient to show that the same star is not visible at the same moment by two parallel lines of sight when only one yard asunder. A slight inclination of the second tube towards th...

"The St. George’s Channel between Holyhead and Kingstown Harbor near Dublin is 60 miles across. When half-way across a ferry passenger will notice behind them the light on Holyhead pier as well as in front of them the Poolbeg light in Dublin Bay. The Holyhead Pier light is 44 feet high, while the Poolbeg lighthouse 68 feet, therefore a vessel in the middle of the channel, 30 miles from either sid e  standing on a deck 24 feet above the water, can clearly see both lights. On a ball Earth 25,000 miles in circumference, however, both lights should be hidden well below both horizons by over 300 feet!"  Another dubious historical quote that I can prove is a lie Dubay has copied this account from Samuel Rowbotham's Zetetic Astronomy and Rowbotham gives no source other than to say "It is well known". However rather than going on hearsay, how about going to an official document issued by the British Admiralty to aid the captains navigating the seas around the w...

“The Isle of Wight lighthouse in England is 180 feet high  and can be seen up to 42 miles away, a distance at which  modern astronomers say the light should fall 996 feet below  line of sight.” This is late 1800's testimony from a flat earth believer and activist According to Thomas Winship (Zetetic Consmogeny) this proof is taken from an article in "The Earth - not a globe - Review", a flat earth publication, titled "The Bible verses Science" by J. C. Akester.  I believe that J. C. Akester was the long-time flat earther activist in the Universal Zetetic Society founded in 1892. So not exactly a disinterested source of information and as an unverifiable claim can hardly be considered a proof. There is also good reason to believe that these observations of distant lighthouse sightings are bogus. For details click the link below. Why Dubay's lighthouse quotes are bogus < Prev     81-90    Next >

“The lighthouse steeple of St Botolph's Parish Church in Boston is 290 feet tall and visible from over 40 miles away, where it should be hidden a full 800 feet below the horizon.” Probably a bogus observation, but in any case Dubay and Samuel Rowbotham can't do trigonometry. For evidence that the quoted observation is bogus, click here: Why Dubay's lighthouse quotes are bogus However, if you want to take the observation as genuine read on to see why this still does not add up to a proof. Using the correct figure and calculation, the observer on the ship would have to be at a height of 244 feet.  From the deck of a ship that would mean that the observer would be about 238 feet too low to see the lighthouse. According to Thomas Winship ( Zetetic Consmogeny ) this proof is taken from an 2nd May 1896 publication called "Answers".  In 1886 the ships that would be observing the lighthouse would be sailing ships or steam ships that still had sails...

“The light at Cape Bonavista, Newfoundland is 150 feet above sea-level and visible at 35 miles, where it should be 491 feet below the horizon.” Probably a bogus observation, but in any case Dubay and Samuel Rowbotham can't do trigonometry. For evidence that the quoted observation is bogus, click here: Why Dubay's lighthouse quotes are bogus However, if you want to take the observation as genuine read on to see why this still does not add up to a proof. The focal height of the light is actually 167 feet not 150. Using the correct figure and calculation, the observer on the ship would have to be at a height of 245 feet.  From the deck of a ship that would mean that the observer would be about 239 feet too low to see the lighthouse. However, as  with so many of Dubays "proofs" this is taken from Samuel Rowbotham's "Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe" published in 1881. The relevant paragraphs from the book are: "Many instances ...

“The Cordonan Light on the west coast of France is 207 feet high and visible from 31 miles away, where it should be 280 feet below the line of sight.” Probably a bogus observation, but in any case Dubay and Samuel Rowbotham can't do trigonometry. For evidence that the quoted observation is bogus, click here: Why Dubay's lighthouse quotes are bogus However, if you want to take the observation as genuine read on to see why this still does not add up to a proof. Using the correct calculation, the observer on the ship would have to be at a height of 119 feet. From the deck of a ship that would mean that the observer would be about 103 feet too low to see the lighthouse. However, as  with so many of Dubays "proofs" this is taken from Samuel Rowbotham's "Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe" published in 1881. The relevant paragraphs from the book are: "Many instances could be given of lights being visible at sea for distances whic...

“The Light at Madras on the Esplanade, is 132 feet high and visible from 28 miles away, where it should be 250 feet below the line of sight.” Probably a bogus observation, but in any case Dubay and Samuel Rowbotham can't do trigonometry. For evidence that the quoted observation is bogus, click here: Why Dubay's lighthouse quotes are bogus However, if you want to take the observation as genuine read on to see why this still does not add up to a proof. Using the correct calculation, the observer on the ship would have to be at a height of 129 feet. From the deck of a ship that would mean that the observer would be about 114 feet too low to see the lighthouse. However, as  with so many of Dubays "proofs" this is taken from Samuel Rowbotham's "Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe" published in 1881. The relevant paragraphs from the book are: "Many instances could be given of lights being visible at sea for distances which would b...

“The Egerö Light in Norway is 154 feet above high water and visible from 28 miles statute miles where it should be 230 feet below the horizon.” Probably a bogus observation, but in any case Dubay and Samuel Rowbotham can't do trigonometry. For evidence that the quoted observation is bogus, click here: Why Dubay's lighthouse quotes are bogus However, if you want to take the observation as genuine read on to see why this still does not add up to a proof. Using the correct calculation, the observer on the ship would have to be at a height of 109 feet. From the deck of a ship that would mean that the observer would be about 90 feet too low to see the lighthouse. However, as  with so many of Dubays "proofs" this is taken from Samuel Rowbotham's "Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe" published in 1881. The relevant paragraphs from the book are: "Many instances could be given of lights being visible at sea for distances which would b...

“The Port Nicholson Light in New Zealand is 420 feet above sea-level and visible from 35 miles away where it should be 220 feet below the horizon.” Probably a bogus observation, but in any case Dubay and Samuel Rowbotham can't do trigonometry. For evidence that the quoted observation is bogus, click here: Why Dubay's lighthouse quotes are bogus However, if you want to take the observation as genuine read on to see why this still does not add up to a proof. Dubay again uses the incorrect calculation to determine how high the observer needs to be to see the light. Using the correct calculation, the observer on the ship would have to be at a height of 65 feet. From the deck of a ship that would mean that the observer would be about 50 feet too low to see the lighthouse. However, as  with so many of Dubays "proofs" this is taken from Samuel Rowbotham's "Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe" published in 1881. The relevant paragraphs f...

“The distance from which various lighthouse lights around the world are visible at sea far exceeds what could be found on a ball-Earth 25,000 miles in circumference. For example, the Dunkerque Light in southern France at an altitude of 194 feet is visible from a boat (10 feet above sea-level) 28 miles away. Spherical trigonometry dictates that if the Earth was a globe with the given curvature of 8 inches per mile squared, this light should be hidden 190 feet below the horizon.” Probably a bogus observation, but in any case Dubay and Samuel Rowbotham can't do trigonometry. For evidence that the quoted observation is bogus, click here: Why Dubay's lighthouse quotes are bogus However, if you want to take the observation as genuine read on to see why this still does not add up to a proof. . Firstly Dubay again uses the incorrect calculation to determine how high the observer needs to be to see the light.  Using the correct calculation, the observer on the ship ...

“Dr. Rowbotham conducted several other experiments using telescopes, spirit levels, sextants and “theodolites,” special precision instruments used for measuring angles in horizontal or vertical planes. By positioning them at equal heights aimed at each other successively he proved over and over the Earth to be perfectly flat for miles without a single inch of curvature. His findings caused quite a stir in the scientific community and thanks to 30 years of his efforts, the shape of the Earth became a hot topic of debate around the turn of the nineteenth century.” More worthless historic testimonials from a known charlatan Samuel Rowbotham (Not Dr.) believed the Earth is flat so any quote from him will obviously support this.  However we can ask how reliable a witness Mr Rowbotham is. He was hardly a upstanding citizen, at one point going under the false names “S Golden” and "Dr. Samuel Birley" (presumably where Dubay gets the Dr title from) selling quack secrets for...

“Also Quoting Dr. Rowbotham, “On the shore near Waterloo, a few miles to the north of Liverpool, a good telescope was fixed, at an elevation of 6 feet above the water. It was directed to a large steamer, just leaving the River Mersey, and sailing out to Dublin. Gradually the mast-head of the receding vessel came nearer to the horizon, until, at length, after more than four hours had elapsed, it disappeared. The ordinary rate of sailing of the Dublin steamers was fully eight miles an hour; so that the vessel would be, at least, thirty-two miles distant when the mast-head came to the horizon. The 6 feet of elevation of the telescope would require three miles to be deducted for convexity, which would leave twenty-nine miles, the square of which, multiplied by 8 inches, gives 560 feet; deducting 80 feet for the height of the main-mast, and we find that, according to the doctrine of rotundity, the mast-head of the outward bound steamer should have been 480 feet below the horizon. Many other...

“Quoting “Earth Not a Globe!” by Samuel Rowbotham, “It is known that the horizon at sea, whatever distance it may extend to the right and left of the observer on land, always appears as a straight line. The following experiment has been tried in various parts of the country. At Brighton, on a rising ground near the race course, two poles were fixed in the earth six yards apart, and directly opposite the sea. Between these poles a line was tightly stretched parallel to the horizon. From the center of the line the view embraced not less than 20 miles on each side making a distance of 40 miles. A vessel was observed sailing directly westwards; the line cut the rigging a little above the bulwarks, which it did for several hours or until the vessel had sailed the whole distance of 40 miles. The ship coming into view from the east would have to ascend an inclined plane for 20 miles until it arrived at the center of the arc, whence it would have to descend for the same distance. The square of...

“ In a second  experiment Dr. Rowbotham affixed flags 5 feet high along the shoreline, one at every mile marker. Then using his telescope mounted at 5 feet just behind the first flag looked over the tops of all 6 flags which lined up in a perfectly straight line. If the Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference the flags should have progressively dipped down after the first establishing line of sight, the second would have descended 8 inches, 32 inches for the third, 6 feet for the fourth, 10 feet 8 inches for the fifth, and 16 feet 8 inches for the sixth.” If true this would indeed indicate that the Earth was flat, however this is an experimental result that no-one has been able to reproduce, and in my opinion Samuel Rowbotham was just falsifying the account. Dubay has a fondness for citing 200 year old experiments and opinions.  Knowledge by its nature advances with time, and Dubay's lack of more up to date corroborating experiments undermines the credibility of...

“Samuel Rowbotham’s experiments at the Old Bedford Level proved conclusively the canal’s water to be completely flat over a 6 mile stretch. First he stood in the canal with his telescope held 8 inches above the surface of the water, then his friend in a boat with a 5 foot tall flag sailed the 6 miles away. If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference the 6 mile stretch of water should have comprised an arc exactly 6 feet high in the middle, so the entire boat and flag should have ultimately disappeared, when in fact the entire boat and flag remained visible at the same height for the entire journey.” The results of this experiment by Samuel Rowbotham in 1838 did indeed suggest a flat Earth, however Dubay fails to mention that subsequent experiments showed that the original experiment was flawed and that the Earth was in fact curved and that objects did disappear over the horizon. The reason that the flag could be seen well beyond the horizon was because of refraction. ...