I've done a lot of time lapse photography of the stars... the rotation of the Earth is very evident... unless we are holding still and all the stars are rotating around us. How is this explained?

If the earth is flat what explains the tides?

Are there S.A.M. sites dedicated to keeping people from exploring the edges of the map?

What explains the rising and setting of the sun at different times on opposite sides of the Earth? If it was flat wouldn't we all get daylight at the same time?

I've done a lot of time lapse photography of the stars... the rotation of the Earth is very evident... unless we are holding still and all the stars are rotating around us. How is this explained?

The only thing IMO that's evident here is that the stars are moving around us. The motion of the earth has not been scientifically measured by anyone.

If the earth is flat what explains the tides?

Water is diamagnetic and is REPELLED by the moon. Also with the sun travelling overhead, water expands and contracts. That's all I have on this ATM sorry. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN2YtXIgubA

Are there S.A.M. sites dedicated to keeping people from exploring the edges of the map?

I don't know about that, I know people have gone missing. The antarctic is very inhospitable at the best of times. Also no one is allowed to just go there and have a look.

The Antarctic Treaty

ENCYCLOPEDIA From 1958 Mentions DOME At 13,000ft In Antarctica

What explains the rising and setting of the sun at different times on opposite sides of the Earth? If it was flat wouldn't we all get daylight at the same time?

On the FE model the sun is much smaller and much closer. Not bright enough to light up the entire disc - only about half.

FE Animation

Why is water repelled by the moon? Couldn't a moon rock be used to show this on a smaller scale on Earth? The tides rise and fall without the water temperature changing... if it expanded to this extent I would feel it heat and cool during the course of a day.

Are all aircraft controlled by some globalist cabal to prevent anyone from just trying to fly off the edges?

What keeps the water attached to this flat disc? Wouldn't it just pour off the sides like a trying to fill an upside down bowl?

How do eclipses ever happen if the sun and moon are constantly just chasing each other's tails? Why would seasons happen if they moved like hands on a clock?

Are NASA and SpaceX and everything else just a cover to continue hiding the truth?

Shadows appear differently at different times of the year, if the Sun was just a tiny flashlight flying around us the shadows would be consistent year round.

Why is water repelled by the moon? Because it's diamagnetic.

Couldn't a moon rock be used to show this on a smaller scale on Earth?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/6105902/Moon-rock-given-to-Holland-by-Neil-Armstrong-and-Buzz-Aldrin-is-fake.html

Are all aircraft controlled by some globalist cabal to prevent anyone from just trying to fly off the edges?

No. All planes are designed to fly over a flat and stationary earth. See the conclusions on Page 36: https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88104main_H-1391.pdf

Why would seasons happen if they moved like hands on a clock?

Because the sun moves in bigger and smaller circles during the course of the year. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R52_PdZlSq8

Are NASA and SpaceX and everything else just a cover to continue hiding the truth?

Yes.

Shadows appear differently at different times of the year, if the Sun was just a tiny flashlight flying around us the shadows would be consistent year round.

Nope. See previous video.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/6105902/Moon-rock-given-to-Holland-by-Neil-Armstrong-and-Buzz-Aldrin-is-fake.html

So one rock of questionable provienance somehow proves that all moon rocks around the world are fake? Including those examined by scientists?

The amount you have to reach for that conclusion would let you touch the moon on your own!

So what exactly is to haunt from lying about the shape of the Earth?

The true nature of reality IMO.

What does that hide? Speaking cryptically isn't going to convince people you're right, no matter how mystic you think you sound?

Not trying to sound cryptic or mystic at all. If the earth is not a rock floating in space, WHAT is it?

I dunno, that seems like a problem with the FE theory, not with actual science. And how could it be any more interesting/meaningful than the commonly accepted facts?

Would love to see some "actual science" data for the ball model. And just because something is "commonly accepted", does not make it true.

That's a bit of a broad question, and I know you're going to say the Illuminati are responsible for everything I give.

No. All planes are designed to fly over a flat and stationary earth. See the conclusions on Page 36: https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88104main_H-1391.pdf

Would you please elaborate where on page 36 you find evidence for your claim?

Apologies, Page 30, Concluding Remarks.

I could swear that was on page 35. Weird.

Except, this isn't a conclusion that the earth is flat and doesn't rotate. It is just an assumption to simplify the derivations. Probably in the temporal and spatial scales that concern aerodynamics of an airplane, this is a reasonable assumption to make. This proves literally nothing. Physics and engineering make similar simplifications all the time to derive equations that are simple and easy to code, that doesn't mean reality actually is flat or frictionless or anything else. You cannot use this as proof of anything, and those who wrote it would gladly tell you that.

this isn't a conclusion that the earth is flat and doesn't rotate.

I never said it was. But if you truly believe that real world conditions can be safely ignored when designing an airliner then I can't help you.

You absolutely said it was. You presented it as evidence of your claim.

And of course a lot of things can be ignored, we do it all the time. I'm in STEM (maths/physics), in my field we ignore the effects of general relativity because the phenomena we are studying do not move fast enough for those effects to be relevant. When you study particle physics at CERN, you don't care there was a tornado in Texas because it won't have an impact on your experiment. People who do biotech don't include the rotation of the Earth in their derivations. We always simplify, in everything we do. I am going to assume you have no background in science or research, since this is such a surprise to you.

If you want to use science to debate your theory, then you need to accept the methods of science. You can't accept science as a way to argue for your ideas and then dismiss it as soon as it doesn't prove what you want it to.

Ok then why don't you use science to show me an example of an object in nature that attracts another object by virtue of it's mass alone?

Or even better, use Newton's first law of motion to explain to me how a light aircraft can safely take off or land on a North / South orientated runway, while said runway is moving West to East at 1000mph?

When you're done with that, show me your hard, scientific, empirical evidence that you live on a spinning ball.

No need to get hostile. The premises was that you cannot use the linked paper as evidence of anything. It uses two assumptions in its derivations to simplify, and this does not give any of your claims legitimacy. Will you agree on that?

I don't think you're legit that's why.

Oh, well that's an easy way to avoid discussing anything specific. Please, shoot the messenger. Also, do you have two accounts?

You mean like you ignoring the science questions? And no I'm not using 2 accounts. Believe it or not, I'm not the only flat earther out there. Strange but true.

I love science, and I love discussing science. I would have no problem discussing with a flat earther, I will gladly provide evidence for my claims and refute yours. It's fun. But you are clearly hostile and uninterested in anything but obtuse links with no root in scientific analysis, and flinging off even more obtuse claims as soon as your links are questioned. If you can't keep a scientific discussion civil, then good luck with discussing with anyone.

For someone who spends a lot of time in r/askwomen and r/feminism, I'm quite curious to know how you all of a sudden became interested in flat earth?

I'm a scientist. It's my job. I obviously think FE is a joke, but I am happy to discuss specific science with anyone. Is it difficult to understand that someone could be a feminist in STEM?

4500 Comment Karma, and your "science" posts only started 3 days ago lol. Bye bye!

I understand you are out of your depth, that's fine. Have a nice day.

And of course a lot of things can be ignored, we do it all the time.

How scientific.

we ignore the effects of general relativity

Because it's bullshit.

The only thing IMO that's evident here is that the stars are moving around us. The motion of the earth has not been scientifically measured by anyone.

Yes it has been

Water is diamagnetic and is REPELLED by the moon. Also with the sun travelling overhead, water expands and contracts. That's all I have on this ATM sorry

This is false

I don't know about that, I know people have gone missing. The antarctic is very inhospitable at the best of times. Also no one is allowed to just go there and have a look.

Yes they are. Anybody can go look.

On the FE model the sun is much smaller and much closer. Not bright enough to light up the entire disc - only about half.

Light obviously works differently for you then.

Based on your posting, I've concluded that you are from an alternate dimension where the Earth is indeed flat. However in My Dimension, it is very clearly a Sphere.

clearly a Sphere.

Can you name 10 proofs that you are living on a spinning ball?

1. When I go out boating, I cannot see the bottom of the Skyscrapers as I leave shore. If I use my Binoculars, I still cannot see them.

2. The sun rises in the sky, and does not get larger or smaller. it stays the exact same size

3. I Have seen Lunar Eclipses, Impossible on a flat earth

4. I have seen the planet Jupiter and Saturn with a shitty Walmart Telescope

5. I have friends who have flown directly from Chile to New Zealand and it did not take 24+ Hours like on the model you showed

6. 900 Million people living in the southern Hemisphere can see the Southern Cross Constellation, in the same spot, but those in the Northern Hemisphere cannot.

7. If you make a time lapse of the sky in both the Southern and Northern Hemisphere with a shitty Walmart Recorder, you will see all the stars revolving around a point called "The Celestial North Pole" if you are in the northern hemisphere, or "The Celestial South Pole" if they are in the Southern Hemisphere.

8. If you go from the Northern Hemisphere to the Southern Hemisphere, the Moon will appear to look Upside down. It does not matter what location in both hemispheres, only the Latitude.

9. The Phases of the moon exist

10. I have seen, with my own eyes, Satellites and the ISS with said shitty walmart telescope.

All without having to show pictures of earth from space, which you will undoubtedly cry "Fake!".

Looooool thanks for outing yourself. I see no evidence listed above whatsoever.

Oh good, you're just a troll taking the piss at everything, and clearly don't actually believe what your saying. Have Fun Trolling!

If water is repelled by the moon, then why do we have a high tide when the moon is (generally) overhead? Shouldn't it be the opposite? And why are there two high and low tides per day?

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

You haven't sufficiently answered any question. Where is the content? I'm as willing as the next person, Heck maybe even moreso than others to accept any evidence. But currently, you say that all these people are (knowingly or not)spreading lies, but with no proof of your own. I would even accept you taking a specific study and showing the faults and errors in the scientific arguments.

NASA are not the only organisation involved in space studies. In fact a lot of what we "know" comes from scientists collaboration and funding from the R.Catholic Church across the world.

I would like to know however as no one seems to have yet asked the question. Why, when people travel in only one direction (by plane/boat) on this earth, end up coming to the same place (full circle) on a flat earth?*

-Also I would really appreciate an answer here and not having to read through that post you have made before. Or an answer where you tell me to do research as your post title reads: to answer questions.

*or even the measurement of a signal between satellites.

Seeing how you can see planets with a relatively cheap telescope, how do you explain the earth being the only flat body in the universe?

I flew from the US to Australia going east. It took about a day and a half.

On the return trip I again went east and it took about 14 hours.

How the hell would this be possible if the earth was flat?

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

We both know I wasn't the pilot. No need to be silly. This was about 10 years ago so no I cannot look up the flight log.

That being said, what is your explanation for my experience?

I went from the US east coast to London. Then to Germany. Then to Singapore. Then to Sydney.

On my return trip I went from Sydney to LAX.

If the Earth was flat how could the return trip possibly be 1/3 of the departure trip?

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

That's because they follow a Great Circle.

Can you give me the flight numbers and the dates?

It was about 10 years ago, but I saved the tickets. When I get home Ill look up the flight path. Im sure it is archived online.

Cool thanks. Will try to plot out your routes on a ball map and a FE map.

Ill just say now that I 100% do not believe the flat Earth theory. That being said, I am open to reasonable discussion. If you can plot out something that explains my experience I am willing to listen.

International flight paths are a big point of interest for us flat earthers. Ultimately it doesn't prove the shape of the earth (the utter lack of actual physical curvature over water is what proves it) , but it's a very interesting piece of the puzzle.

Flat Earthers LOOOVE talking about flat earth, looking forward to the discussion.

Ill be home in a couple of hours. Ill reply to this comment again when I find the flight numbers.

I'm not in the US and it's almost bed time lol, but I will reply in the morning.

QFA 27 and 63.

Your tactics as well as your Dunning-Kruger is showing.

What tactics? You said international flights are a big point of interest for you, so I simply gave you 2 flights that i still haven't had an explanation for from anyone.

Did you know it's possible to look at anyone's posting history on Reddit? I saw some of your posts - it's all the same old tactics. You really need to rethink your strategy. It's getting old.

Mind steering me to where you see this strategy then? Because all I'm seeing is the typical fe strategy from you, which is steer away from the question to something irrelevant. Please, just answer the original comment.

A direct flight from Sydney to lax is much shorter than a flight from east coast us to sydney (going east) with three stops.

Edit: what I should have said is that the distance between sydney and lax is much shorter than the distance between us east coast and sydney when going east

Where do meteorites fit into this such as the one that exploded over Russia? If we're under a dome, they shouldn't get through, right?

My uncle used to work for NASA, and a long time ago he asked me why rainbows are curved and I said it's because the sunlight passes through the raindrops to give them that shape. He just smiled and chuckled. I think he knew that it was actually because of the reflection off of the dome...

You seem to be a novice

You say this all the time when you can't actually answer a question. How bout you help him out since you're some sort of expert and point him to some relevant information.

"Ridicule a fools first and last argument"

Obviously whatever hit Russia was in our firmament.

And you call me retarded?

Sorry, I'm not interested in a private conversation with some wacko. I'm only here for the entertainment value of your mental illness.

Also, there are so many questions in here that you have left unanswered. You did say you were here to answer our questions.

Yes, I'll be honest and tell you that I have more important things to research such as the global pedophile ring. I don't find your answer adequate. I have read what the Bible says about the firmament. I was hoping you could provide a better answer to what I thought was a rather simple question. I really don't have time to research this on my own, so that's why I was asking someone who says they're an expert and offered to answer all questions. Guess mine is the exception. Sorry if I sound perturbed...

How old were you when you realized you were special ?

The origins of the flat earth "conspiracy" is intended as an attack on logic and reason. A false conspiracy theory meant to blur the lines between real and fake and further confuse people.

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

When your theory includes flat out denying any and all scientific research that disproves it as "government propaganda" then yes it probably is more likely.

I for one find it hard to believe that millions of scientists from all over the globe have been colluding against the public for thousands of years to convince them the Earth is round. It is preposterous.

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

A lot of things are theories. Just because it is not a law does not mean that it isn't true. Evolution is a theory as well, but I have a feeling you don't believe in that either.

Occams Razor is most definitely not preposterous, but imo and the opinion of billions of people the Earth being round is the logical conclusion to make with regards to Occams Razor.

Gravity is not a theory, it's an observable, measurable and predictable constant in the universe.

There are competing models for the theory of gravitation. The most widely accepted (i.e., not yet disproved or improved) is relativity. Prior to relativity the most widely accepted theory was Newtonian gravity. We know now that Newtonian physics are crude approximations.

Other theories exist, including quantum gravity, and they are being refined and improved.

one that has never been proven.

This tells me you do not understand the scientific method. Mathematics has proofs, because it's a finite, logical language that allows for it. Nature doesn't have "proof." Even the most fundamental of scientific theories aren't "proven," they are simply accepted because no better model has been proposed.

But having a model (or theory) to describe a natural phenomenon doesn't change the fact that the natural phenomenon exists independent of the model.

Would gravity still exist without humans trying to explain it? Of course it would.

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

So you have no retort other than insults?

As I mentioned, work on quantum gravity is ongoing. The holy grail of physics right now is interrelating all of the observed forces, including gravity, since relativity related EM, Weak and Strong.

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/scientific-theory

Please note the last bit: "repeatedly confirmed through experiment or observation"

nope.

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

your name suits you brother thumbs up

Wait. It changes shape?

an attack on logic and reason

I disagree. You don't feel or experience any movement whatsoever, therefore you would logically have to assume that you are not moving. Occam's Razor. Experiencing no movement and then assuming you are moving is illogical.

lol. Have a good day guys.

Cheers thanks same to you.

We can only sense changes in velocity (acceleration or negative acceleration {deceleration} based on vestibulo-related reflexes. We generally do not experience galactic level changes because they are relatively constant for us.

So whilst coming to this information-less Reddit post, and being somewhat annoyed that no Questions have been answered by the OP. I thought I would at least show that you sir, have incredibly ill-judged logic.

Logic alone is not great. Most logical arguments can be and are fallacies, however you simply fail to determine the logica of fairly simplistic biology.

Please don't presume to speak for for me. I know when I'm moving thanks.

So you've never been in a moving car?

I'll save this thread... be good to look back on it if I'm feeling in need of a laugh lol wow

Are you actually going to answer anyone's question?

1. Explain satellites
2. Explain how you can follow the sun with an airplane
3. Explain why all other planets are a ball but earth is supposed to be a disc

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

Wait, Crow is a flat earther? I didn't know that...

Explain satellites

There are no satellites. Troposheric Scatter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropospheric_scatter GPS uses base towers and cellphone towers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangulation

Explain how you can follow the sun with an airplane

On the FE model the sun moves in a circular motion over the circle of the earth. So you can follow it with a plane.

Explain why all other planets are a ball but earth is supposed to be a disc

The other "planets" are lights in the sky, not planetary bodies. https://youtu.be/DbLu9fcQI4w

But, I've seen satellites and ISS through a telescope.

Everyone keeps saying that. Did you take any pictures? By the way, I fully agree there are weird lights moving around up there - not disputing that at all. The question is just what the hell are they?

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2011/02/robbullen_iss_discovery.jpg

Here's a photo of ISS from the ground.

And I'll bet $100 this won't change your mind.

And the answer is: they are satellites.

No, I did not take a picture as I did not expect to need it in order to debunk something so ridiculous.

What would it matter anyhow? You'd just invent some reasoning for as to why it isn't actually a satellite.

I had a friend that was killed at Sandy Hook. Trust me it happened. (that's your arguement)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfshAzV0FN4&index=49&list=LLSXye39ElfjQDBCFme1MsjQ&t=4s

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1. What's on the other side (bottom) of the earth?
2. Why are there no reports of people being at the edge of the earth?
3. What is at the edge? Can you fall of earth?
4. What's the purpose of the lie of a round earth? Like who benefits?
5. What's with ships at the horizon?
6. How thick is the earth?
7. When did "they" (who are they?) "installed" the stars?
8. What's with scientists like Einstein, Hubble or Hawking? Are they all bribed?

To add to this.

How can you explain planetary physics if the Earth is flat? Are all planets flat? Are there even other planets? Are physicists also in on this grand coverup? Why would millions of scientists lie for thousands of years?

Really? Things fall because of density? Then why is gravity the same on oceans as dry land, even though water is far less dense than ground? If you know so much more than any scientists, that should be simple to explain.

Have you even taken an undergraduate physics class? The first thing you do in lab is observe classical mechanics in action. You replicate most relevant ideas, hands on.

Are you telling me that my lab was rigged? Or that my eyes fool me?

There are no "planets" in the flat earth model whatsoever. Also no outer space.

If you believe a lie, and you don't know it's a lie, are you lying when telling it to someone?

I didn't know there was no outer space in FE. If there is no outer space then why can I watch a live stream from the ISS right now?

Why can I see the ISS with a telescope?

Why can I see other planets with a telescope?

Where are all of those rockets being shot going?

Are all astronauts liars?

I didn't know there was no outer space in FE. If there is no outer space then why can I watch a live stream from the ISS right now?

Because it's CGI

Why can I see the ISS with a telescope?

Show me your footage with date and time stamp.

Why can I see other planets with a telescope?

See previous answer.

Where are all of those rockets being shot going?

Dumping in the ocean and then recovered.

Are all astronauts liars?

Yes, or hypnotized.

1: We don't know, the only thing we know about how far earth goes is that we did dig 8 miles. That's it.

So you are completely ignorant of geology - got it.

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

Thank you for your extended response here and my other comment. While I'm not convinced, I appreciate your patient and open discussion. Is there a source which would give some reliable answers? I'm especially interested in point 4, how the round earth disconnects us from our real purpose and nature of life.

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

OK. You got me to the point, where I'm no longer laughing about that theory. But after the first video I have follow-up questions:

1. What religion is behind that with the "creator" being mentioned multiple times?
2. How old is the earth according to FE?
3. Do dinosaurs play a role in this concept?
4. [s]If you take a weather balloon and attach a camera to it the earth appears to be pretty round. How come? (https://youtu.be/95NDkABAsSk)[/s] (answered in 2nd video)
5. Is there any theory about quantum physics in relation to FE? Thank you.

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

is it possible that the earth is neither flat nor round but that flat earth and round earth are two ways of describing and analysing a 4-plus dimensional object? to me what's most interesting is-- what kind of information do we get from flat earth and round earth theories that is useful to our understanding of phenomena? i think both models have insights to contribute and maybe are more reconcilable than appears at first glance.

Schrödingers earth. Flat and round at the same time. :)

Yes it is. It's made up and not real and scientifically proven false.

Simple question: Why do people still bring this crap up?

[deleted]

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

Bunkbed Earth confirmed!

[deleted]

think of a giant cookie. We are on the surface of that cookie. Maybe if you dig deep enough, you find that the cookie is hollow. Maybe not. But FE thinks more "cookie" and less "ball". We are all on the top of the cookie. We've never seen the bottom of the cookie. I think most flat earthers think that we are under a dome or firmament.

Explain the motion of the stars and sun. This is what they look like in the most commonly asserted Flat Earth model: https://youtu.be/uexZbunD7Jg

What about the flights going through Antarctica?

/r/flatearth/comments/5f6r8c/the_worlds_longest_flights/

Explain how the sun/moon sets/rises.

How far did you go in school? Which grade did you drop out and decide you were smarter than everyone?

Yes I have a question. The Earth was proven to be round over 2000 years ago. So why do you cretins insist on trying to spread disinformation and undo thousands of years of scientific inquiry?

I have read that moonlight is not actually reflected sunlight and this can be verified through temperature measurments. The idea is that moonlight is actually COOLING and can be verified by taking temperature measurements under a full moon, both direct moonlight and then in the "shade". Anyone ever try this experiment for themselves? OP? Any non flat earth believers interested in me performing this experiment and recording results? I live at high altitude Colorado so I would have lower atmospheric interference than most.

For flat earth newbs, recall everything in life is yin/yang. Balance of good and evil (or in the case of our current world, imbalance, hence the tension). Moon and sun are opposites (and nearly the same physical size, one is not greater than the other, they are equals). The motion of the sun and moon mimicks a spinning yin yang symbol.

We both know I wasn't the pilot. No need to be silly. This was about 10 years ago so no I cannot look up the flight log.

That being said, what is your explanation for my experience?

I went from the US east coast to London. Then to Germany. Then to Singapore. Then to Sydney.

On my return trip I went from Sydney to LAX.

If the Earth was flat how could the return trip possibly be 1/3 of the departure trip?

COMMENT AND USER CENSORED

A direct flight from Sydney to lax is much shorter than a flight from east coast us to sydney (going east) with three stops.

Edit: what I should have said is that the distance between sydney and lax is much shorter than the distance between us east coast and sydney when going east

That's because they follow a Great Circle.

Ok then why don't you use science to show me an example of an object in nature that attracts another object by virtue of it's mass alone?

Or even better, use Newton's first law of motion to explain to me how a light aircraft can safely take off or land on a North / South orientated runway, while said runway is moving West to East at 1000mph?

When you're done with that, show me your hard, scientific, empirical evidence that you live on a spinning ball.

And of course a lot of things can be ignored, we do it all the time.

How scientific.

we ignore the effects of general relativity

Because it's bullshit.