Danny Faulkner’s book, “Falling Flat,” takes an unorthodox approach to addressing the flat earth debate on both the biblical front and the scientific front. As a Christian and an astronomer, he assures us that he is eminently qualified to write a book on this topic. Unfortunately for us, it turns out he is a very poor writer and an even worse debater. The book consists of 13 chapters of convoluted arguments, pseudoscientific evidence, and presumption after presumption.
The entire book is packed with fallacious reasoning and logical fallacies. It’s a hard book to critique, but not because it doesn’t have mistakes and errors that an 8th grader with a classical education could not easily recognize, but because the book has so many mistakes and errors.
The challenge in critiquing Faulkner’s book isn’t that there isn’t enough to critique–it’s that it is an overwhelming task because you’re stopped by a train wreck in nearly every paragraph, and much of the time the disasters are from sentence to sentence. How much should a critiquer delve into all the problems in Faulkner’s arguments and pseudoscience, and how much should we mention his shredding of traditional hermeneutics and exegesis when it comes to addressing biblical arguments?
I can almost hear readers saying, “Well, why don’t you tell us how you really feel?” I know, this is a harsh critique, and it’s only the beginning. But Faulkner takes on one of the most serious and important subjects of our day: whether the earth is a sphere in a heliocentric system or flat in a geocentric system. And he presumes to prove his arguments from both biblical and scientific perspectives.
His book is an epic failure, and this series of articles critiquing his book will lay out our rebuttal demonstrating his failure, and more importantly, the failure of his arguments.
The first chapter is a disjointed mess, structurally, grammatically, logically, and one would think that Danny Faulkner had no experience whatsoever debating a subject or making a persuasive argument to support his position.
A couple of highlights from the first chapter will illustrate some, but not all, of the problems.