Latest Contributions
Of course there's something about Christians (duh!)
Randall Smith recently posted a surprising article (surprising from a Christian point of view) in The Catholic Thing. Generally, I find the contributors to The Catholic Thing to be worth reading, by which I mean they bring nuggets of insight that I hadn't already happened on myself. But the latest piece by Smith, titled "Our (Incoherent) Post-Modern Condition," seems to me to be a big miss.
Another experiment that should be done
Apparently, some flat-earthers recently traveled to Antarctica to witness the summer 24-hour sun, something that doesn't happen in any any flat-earth model. One of the main flat-earth proponents on the trip, after observing the 24-hour sun, admitted that he had been wrong. Of course, this didn't convince all the other flat-earthers who didn't make a personal trip to the South Pole. They just say that he's helping to create a green-screen fake.
Of course, one doesn't need to go to the poles of the Earth to see that it's not flat. Just look at a horizon at sea. On a flat earth the "horizon" will always be at eye level, no matter how high above the sea one is.
But here's another experiment that ought to be done, for the sake of a different group of people, geocentrists. Geocentrists make much of the Michelson-Morley experiment that failed to detect the ether that everyone believed existed up until then. The generally-accepted interpretation of the experiment (since the experiment was done in the context of a built-in assumption that the Earth is moving through space) is that there is no ether. Geocentrists put a different "spin" on it: Their contextual assumption is that there must be an ether, otherwise the Earth could not be in a fixed place. The fact that the experiment failed to detect the ether, in the form of a difference in the speed of light traveling in one direction that the other, is interpreted to mean that the Earth is, indeed, motionless.
Well, that is actually a valid interpretation of the results when narrowly considered without input from other scientific data.
But there's a way geocentrists, if they're honest, be convinced: Perform the Michelson-Morley experiment on the moon. If the Earth is motionless according to an etherial reference, then the moon most certainly is not motionless and if the whole experiment were translated to the moon, then it would show movement's effects on the speed of light that the Earth-bound experiment failed to demonstrate.
For this to work, the whole experiment needs to be translated to the moon. Bouncing a laser off the moon and back to the Earth wouldn't work. That is, assuming an ether and a fixed Earth, it wouldn't show anything different. For the experiment to conclusively demonstrate that there is no ether, the whole experiment needs to be in known motion relative to the Earth.
Convincing geocentrists of modern physics is probably not a good justification for such an expensive endeavor, but it would be fun to see how the results would be explained.