The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: fdrph on December 28, 2012, 08:55:00 AM
-
TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round (http://#ws)
I can't believe there are people in 2012 that make up conspiracy theories to why the earth is flat!!! holy moly ! XD
You all make me laught... a lot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=82JyM0h6ukw#t=78s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=82JyM0h6ukw#t=78s)
These videos... watch them XD and photos...
http://i.imgur.com/fPo4p.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/fPo4p.jpg)
http://www.link2universe.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/0124-1003-0413-0210_the_international_space_station_and_planet_earth_o.jpg (http://www.link2universe.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/0124-1003-0413-0210_the_international_space_station_and_planet_earth_o.jpg)
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1104/yuriearth_iss_3032.jpg (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1104/yuriearth_iss_3032.jpg)
The earth is an oblate spheroid, FACT! and there's lots of EVIDENCE to prove that fact...
-
We are not kidding. :o
-
We are not kidding. :o
Well you are all WRONG. obviously I mean c'mon xD LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=n8lFhaMihTg#t=504s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=n8lFhaMihTg#t=504s) inside the space station... 8:06 for the round earth FACT.
-
All of the objections in your videos are easily answered.
-
All of the objections in your videos are easily answered.
not really, you can't answer direct observation without making up ridiculous unproven conspiracy stuff. So no, the earth isn't flat, there is an immense universe out there, we've been to the moon and we have proof, evidence of all of it, unlike you guys.
-
When you see the world only through the eyes of others, then you'll only ever see it as they have told it to you. I find this an extraordinary show of faith and a woeful neglect of curiosity.
-
i can see with my own eyes that tv satilites dishes point to a point 22,000 miles above the equator. going against what is said in fe which uses things that cant be seen to disprove my direct observation? kind of ironic that you dismiss my direct observation and try to explain it away with something that is invisible.
-
they didn't TELL me, THEY RECORDED WITH A VIDEO CAMERA! OH MY! :P VIDEO, REALITY, FACT, EVIDENCE.
-
Don't bother showing this, they have a pseudo-science explanation for everything, actually it's not an explanation, because an explanation have to be supported with evidence, they don't have that.
-
TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round (http://#ws)
-
Well, for starters, it was already posted in another thread.
-
Mind linking me?
-
This website and group look pretty real to me.
-
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,57095.msg1432536.html#msg1432536 (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,57095.msg1432536.html#msg1432536)
-
I found this on youtube. It explains everything so very clearly.
If you are able give me a reason why all 10 of these reasons aren't true I'll be a believer
TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round (http://#ws)
-
Well, for starters, it was already posted in another thread.
Thats true although no person actually formed an argument against it unfortunally :-\
I agree, he makes some silly psudo points, but he also makes some legitimate ones.
If "All of the objections in your videos are easily answered.", a post made by a mod in that thread, then it would be great to hear some answers to it.
-
they didn't TELL me, THEY RECORDED WITH A VIDEO CAMERA! OH MY! :P VIDEO, REALITY, FACT, EVIDENCE.
RE-conspiracy theorists believes everything they find on youtube. Ask yourself some questions before u post conspiracy-videos here please.
Who captured the video and when?
Who had access to the video between the time it was captured and the time it was introduced into for you?
Has the original video been altered in any way since it was captured?
Who enhanced the video, when and why?
What was done to enhance the video and is it repeatable?
Has the enhanced video been altered in any way since it was first enhanced?
Skepticism 4ever
-
i can see with my own eyes that satilites point to a point 22,000 miles above the equator.
What does this even mean? How does a satilite [sic] "point" anywhere?
-
i can see with my own eyes that satilites point to a point 22,000 miles above the equator.
What does this even mean? How does a satilite [sic] "point" anywhere?
How cute, you still think Pythagoras makes sense with his posts.
-
my apologies it was late when i wrote that. edited now. i ment tv satellite dishes all point to geo satellites at various points 22,000 miles over the equator. Fe say that hundreds of thousands of Stratillites replicate the use of satellites. which directly contradicts our observation of where satellite dishes point. you have to read my thread why use satellites ( http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,57001.0.html#.UN7bbW-6eSp (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,57001.0.html#.UN7bbW-6eSp) ) as of yet no one can explain the discrepancy.
-
He doesn't even know what a planet is, don't know why I should take him seriously.
-
Beorn is just got a grudge because he cant answer the question ether so he resorts to making fun. shame id imagen it would make him feel a lot better if he could prove me wrong but as of yet he hasn't managed. when FERs cant answer a question they resort to taking apart mistakes you've made in the way you ask it, spelling mistakes and grammar to try and distract from the fact they have no answer.
-
He doesn't even know what a planet is, don't know why I should take him seriously.
You don't even know what the moon is, don't know why I should take you seriously.
-
Is Orion upside in Australia?
-
orions belt as in the constellations is upside down yes. also many northern hemisphere stars and constellations are not visible in the south and vice versa.
-
The twice setting sun is a wonder, and I am waiting on hearing from those down under, to see if Orion is truly upside down.
-
its is this fact is not contested by anyone not even FE theory
-
Okay, all three of the threads starting with that video have been merged. Next person who posts it is banned.
-
Really? They're posting minutephysics at us now? I love the guy, but he's just mentioning phenomena which also occur on a flat Earth or are assumed and not actually proven.
-
THERE'S A WOMAN IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION FILMING THE EARTH FOR YOU AND YOU STILL RESORT TO STUPID SENTENCES AND BAN THREATS !!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you all make me laugh... seriously... it's the 21st century, stop being retarded. The Earth is an oblate spheroid, FACT. There are people in a space station in orbit and they can observe it directly, FACT!
You can even BUY a freaking telescope and SEE the International Space Sation!!!!!!!!!!! OH MY! maybe you'll see the people inside waving at you giving you the middle finger.... now that would be awesome.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=n8lFhaMihTg#t=504s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=n8lFhaMihTg#t=504s) inside the space station... 8:06 for the round earth FACT.
Do the studio lights dim at 8:58? ???
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=n8lFhaMihTg#t=504s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=n8lFhaMihTg#t=504s) inside the space station... 8:06 for the round earth FACT.
Do the studio lights dim at 8:58? ???
No they do not Dim, she's adjusting the shutter speed on the camera -.-
-
THERE'S A WOMAN IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION FILMING THE EARTH FOR YOU AND YOU STILL RESORT TO STUPID SENTENCES AND BAN THREATS !!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you all make me laugh... seriously... it's the 21st century, stop being retarded. The Earth is an oblate spheroid, FACT. There are people in a space station in orbit and they can observe it directly, FACT!
You can even BUY a freaking telescope and SEE the International Space Sation!!!!!!!!!!! OH MY! maybe you'll see the people inside waving at you giving you the middle finger.... now that would be awesome.
There is no internation space station. Please stop being ignorant. I'd list the logical fallacies, but they're too numerous and I too lazy.
-
THERE'S A WOMAN IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION FILMING THE EARTH FOR YOU AND YOU STILL RESORT TO STUPID SENTENCES AND BAN THREATS !!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you all make me laugh... seriously... it's the 21st century, stop being retarded. The Earth is an oblate spheroid, FACT. There are people in a space station in orbit and they can observe it directly, FACT!
You can even BUY a freaking telescope and SEE the International Space Sation!!!!!!!!!!! OH MY! maybe you'll see the people inside waving at you giving you the middle finger.... now that would be awesome.
There is no internation space station. Please stop being ignorant. I'd list the logical fallacies, but they're too numerous and I too lazy.
again all bark no bite..... saying things is easy right?
ISS through telescope (http://#)
ISS over Munich through the 80cm telescope of the Public Observatory in Munich,
9. July 2010.
"Everyone is invited to go to our observatory and look with your own eyes at the ISS. The adress is:
Bayerische Volkssternwarte Muenchen e.V.
Rosenheimer Str. 145h
81671 Munich, Germany"
-
You would think that a prestigious public observatory would be able to get better footage than that.
-
I'm sorry, but I really don't feel like proving this to a condescending twat such as yourself. I have better things to do with my time. Suffice to say that our arguments are much more sophisticated than that which we are presenting to you.
-
Do the studio lights dim at 8:58? ???
No they do not Dim, she's adjusting the shutter speed on the camera -.-
Ah, I just watched it again with the audio on. That makes more sense.
-
you are presenting no arguments whatsoever actually... and you are running away from evidence, direct, observable, evidence.
and OF COURSE the footage is blurred, the atmosphere does that! why do you think they put a telescope in orbit ( AKA Hubble ) ? photons are deflected and reflected by the molecules in the atmosphere... a telescope can't get a perfect image, never!
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=n8lFhaMihTg#t=504s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=n8lFhaMihTg#t=504s) inside the space station... 8:06 for the round earth FACT.
Do the studio lights dim at 8:58? ???
No they do not Dim, she's adjusting the shutter speed on the camera -.-
Do digital video cameras have shutters?
-
THERE'S A WOMAN IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION FILMING THE EARTH FOR YOU AND YOU STILL RESORT TO STUPID SENTENCES AND BAN THREATS !!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you all make me laugh... seriously... it's the 21st century, stop being retarded. The Earth is an oblate spheroid, FACT. There are people in a space station in orbit and they can observe it directly, FACT!
You can even BUY a freaking telescope and SEE the International Space Sation!!!!!!!!!!! OH MY! maybe you'll see the people inside waving at you giving you the middle finger.... now that would be awesome.
There is no internation space station. Please stop being ignorant. I'd list the logical fallacies, but they're too numerous and I too lazy.
again all bark no bite..... saying things is easy right?
ISS through telescope (http://#)
ISS over Munich through the 80cm telescope of the Public Observatory in Munich,
9. July 2010.
"Everyone is invited to go to our observatory and look with your own eyes at the ISS. The adress is:
Bayerische Volkssternwarte Muenchen e.V.
Rosenheimer Str. 145h
81671 Munich, Germany"
This is the Flat Earth Society. You aren't going to get anywhere with bold facts and statements, miladdo. >:(
-
Do digital video cameras have shutters?
I don't think so, but I didn't think it mattered much because she does say that she is going to fiddle with the camera right before it happens. I didn't want to argue about what it was, because even if it was something else, she's clearly adjusting something. It doesn't much matter what and I have little to no knowledge about the inner workings of digital cameras.
As for the telescope picture, seeing something in the sky is only direct observable evidence of something being in the sky. It isn't evidence of a space craft in a fanciful perpetual free-fall. A blurry photograph taken by someone else, is just that. A blurry photograph of something. Probably.
Your video is purportedly showing me the inside of a space ship -- it isn't that remarkable. I didn't even see something floating, which is what I half expected to see. Why are you convinced it was from a spaceship in free-fall?
-
Do digital video cameras have shutters?
They don't have physical shutters, but they do have a digital equivalent:
http://www.brighthub.com/multimedia/video/articles/45857.aspx (http://www.brighthub.com/multimedia/video/articles/45857.aspx)
-
Regarding that minutephysics video...what was up with that "triangles" reason? He clumsily sketches some misshapen blob onto a ball, claims that it's a triangle with three 90 degree angles (not even close), and therefore...the Earth is round?
-
I think he's trying to demonstrate noneuclidean geometry on the earth's surface. This is odd, because it was the first experiment I performed to determine the earth's geometry, and all the triangles I inscribed had the sum of their angles total 180 degrees. What's worse, is that as presented, it constitutes nothing more than a thought experiment. "If I did this, that, and the other, this would result. Therefore, ... " And none of these assumptions are true or demonstrated. He does not even attempt to demonstrate them. "If the earth was a globe and this would happen." Well, great. Now all we have to do is determine whether that actually happens or exists only in your mind. How does this constitute proof the earth is a globe?
The same with the next thing he brings up: Eratosthenes. If the earth is a globe and the sun's light arrives in parallel rays, then we could determine the diameter of the earth by measuring the different angles of the shadows. Great. I can measure the different angles of shadows thrown by the salt and pepper shakers and candelabra on my kitchen table, but it doesn't make my table any more spherical.
The rest of the video is a boring mismash of familiar globularist canards.
-
I think he's trying to demonstrate noneuclidean geometry on the earth's surface. This is odd, because it was the first experiment I performed to determine the earth's geometry, and all the triangles I inscribed had the sum of their angles total 180 degrees. What's worse, is that as presented, it constitutes nothing more than a thought experiment. "If I did this, that, and the other, this would result. Therefore, ... " And none of these assumptions are true or demonstrated. He does not even attempt to demonstrate them. "If the earth was a globe and this would happen." Well, great. Now all we have to do is determine whether that actually happens or exists only in your mind. How does this constitute proof the earth is a globe?
Furthermore, I don't even think it's possible to demonstrate. If there is anywhere on a round earth where this could be attempted, it would have to be Asia and there are so many obstacles that the experiment would be without integrity at the end. The open oceans would be theoretically big enough, but boats don't travel in straight lines and trying to make them do so would be impossible.
-
Yes, Digital DSLR's have shutters and I have one, I do what she did all he time.....
JUST go to munich and look through that telescope... there's your proof, until then... shut up.
YES! you can do that triangles experiment, you dont have to walk 1000 miles.... much smaller distances also work.... the point is, you would get 270º, not 180º and you would be back to the place you started from.
but your kitchen table IS flat... and the shadows wouldn't point to a spheroid kitchen table, they would point to a FLAT one, which is what it is..
BUT AGAIN, I PRESENTED DIRECT OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE OF THE ISS AND YOU STILL MAKE UP SHITTY ARGUMENTS.... IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO REASON WITH PEOPLE LIKE YOU.... YOU BEHAVE JUST LIKE CREATIONISTS.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/4/4007941_ada343ac73.jpg (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/4/4007941_ada343ac73.jpg)
more observable evidence..
ISS - Cupola (http://#)
Station Tour: Cupola and Leonardo (http://#ws)
-
Yes, Digital DSLR's have shutters and I have one, I do what she did all he time.....
Are you suggesting that a DSLR camera was used to film the video in the ISS? ???
-
YES! you can do that triangles experiment, you dont have to walk 1000 miles.... much smaller distances also work.... the point is, you would get 270º, not 180º and you would be back to the place you started from.
I have done this experiment, and the sum of the angles of the triangle is always 180 degrees. Perhaps you should try this instead of making a pointless thought experiment to reinforce your assumption.
but your kitchen table IS flat... and the shadows wouldn't point to a spheroid kitchen table, they would point to a FLAT one, which is what it is..
The existence of shadows does not point to anything regarding the earth's shape. Nor the table's.
-
THERE'S A WOMAN IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION FILMING THE EARTH FOR YOU AND YOU STILL RESORT TO STUPID SENTENCES AND BAN THREATS !!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you all make me laugh... seriously... it's the 21st century, stop being retarded. The Earth is an oblate spheroid, FACT. There are people in a space station in orbit and they can observe it directly, FACT!
You can even BUY a freaking telescope and SEE the International Space Sation!!!!!!!!!!! OH MY! maybe you'll see the people inside waving at you giving you the middle finger.... now that would be awesome.
Never trust a woman. FACT
The so-called Space Station is in fact located in Arizona......on the ground. FACT
And the telescope manufactuers is part of your sick conspiracy. FACT
I am in fact a quantum physicist. FACT
-
AHHAHAHA like I said... impossible to argue with people like this... the curvature of the earth is directly observable!!! there are a number of ways to do this so instead of making up conspiracy theories to elevate you from everyone else... actually try to prove the earth is round... if you CAN'T prove that the earth is an oblate spheroid... then you can get into flat theories...
AND YOU CAN'T SIMULATE 0 GRAVITY ON THE GROUND!!!!! -.- not with current technology!
-
AHHAHAHA like I said... impossible to argue with people like this... the curvature of the earth is directly observable!!! there are a number of ways to do this so instead of making up conspiracy theories to elevate you from everyone else... actually try to prove the earth is round... if you CAN'T prove that the earth is an oblate spheroid... then you can get into flat theories...
AND YOU CAN'T SIMULATE 0 GRAVITY ON THE GROUND!!!!! -.- not with current technology!
An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof. If you realy belive that the earth is round, the burden of proof is on your side.
-
THERE'S A WOMAN IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION FILMING THE EARTH FOR YOU AND YOU STILL RESORT TO STUPID SENTENCES AND BAN THREATS !!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you all make me laugh... seriously... it's the 21st century, stop being retarded. The Earth is an oblate spheroid, FACT. There are people in a space station in orbit and they can observe it directly, FACT!
You can even BUY a freaking telescope and SEE the International Space Sation!!!!!!!!!!! OH MY! maybe you'll see the people inside waving at you giving you the middle finger.... now that would be awesome.
Never trust a woman. FACT
The so-called Space Station is in fact located in Arizona......on the ground. FACT
And the telescope manufactuers is part of your sick conspiracy. FACT
I am in fact a quantum physicist. FACT
Dr Nor, I am beginning to wonder if you are a Round Earther trying to discredit the Flat Earthers by making yourself look so ridiculous that they will be tarred with the same brush, as it were.
I don't think it's working, son.
-
Dr Nor, I am beginning to wonder if you are a Round Earther trying to discredit the Flat Earthers by making yourself look so ridiculous that they will be tarred with the same brush, as it were.
I don't think it's working, son.
What is not working?
-
The video and photos of the ISS are proof enough... if you don't believe it after seeing that... i'm sorry but you are lost in stupidity and there's nothing I can do to bring you back to reason.
-
The video and photos of the ISS are proof enough... if you don't believe it after seeing that... i'm sorry but you are lost in stupidity and there's nothing I can do to bring you back to reason.
The days of grainy 8 mm films of UFOs, Bigfoot, a round earth and lake monsters are long gone. As video editing software has become — and continues to become — more advanced and user-friendly, high-quality hoax videos are ever-easier to make. Upload those videos to the Internet and they'll zip around the world, thanks in part to a public audience, like you, that is still willing to set aside logic when it comes to paranormal activity.
-
TOP 10 REASONS Why We Know the Earth is Round (http://#ws)
-
10. "The planets that surround us are globular, so the earth is". - Er, no. Why does this follow? The earth is indeed unique. Earth is not the planets. It is the earth and is planar. IRRELEVANT.
9. "Time Zones." Time zones are real. The sun does move across the earth creating different time zones. This has absolutely no bearing on the shape of the earth. IRRELEVANT.
8. "The Coriolis Effect." The info on this youtube vid is incorrect. There have been many instances of right-turning hurricanes in the south, and visa versa. FAIL.
7. "Triangles." This is totally hypothetical and could never be demonstrated to prove anything about the true nature of the earth. Basically, this mathematical equation can not be applied in reality, so proves nothing. So, totally IRRELEVANT.
6. "The Sun." His explanation here is rushed and incomplete. He is talking about using triangulation to show that the earth has curvature. But he is WRONG.
5. "The Stars." Another rushed and incomplete explanation. I agree, the stars do move. Does this prove that the earth is a globe? Of course not. And most certainly does not in this video. FAIL.
4. "Magellan and Circumnavigation." Sailing in a circle on the planar earth does not prove that the earth is a globe. FAIL.
3."The Horizon." Search the Flat Earth Forums for complete views of the Toronto skyline across many miles of lake. Still not successfully debunked. FAIL.
2. "Lunar Eclipse." Again, this would take a lengthy explanation. But briefly, as he says, "the shadow on the moon is curved." So what is making the shadow? Vedic astrologers from thousands of years ago knew the truth. But today we live in ignorant times. The shadow is caused by a, as yet undiscovered by modern astronomers, planetary body. Commonly referred to as the "anti moon." FAIL.
1. "Photographic evidence." This is the best of the lot! This is what first got me really thinking that something is seriously wrong with the conventional view. I was truly astounded to find that there is not one convincing image of the earth taken by any of the world's space agencies.
Mizuki x
-
This has already been posted several times.
-
I was truly astounded to find that there is not one convincing image of the earth taken by any of the world's space agencies.
I'm sorry, but what do you mean by this statement? What would you consider to be a convincing image of the earth?
-
I have merged the two topics since they're obviously done by the same person posting the same video.
-
THERE'S A WOMAN IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION FILMING THE EARTH FOR YOU AND YOU STILL RESORT TO STUPID SENTENCES AND BAN THREATS !!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you all make me laugh... seriously... it's the 21st century, stop being retarded. The Earth is an oblate spheroid, FACT. There are people in a space station in orbit and they can observe it directly, FACT!
You can even BUY a freaking telescope and SEE the International Space Sation!!!!!!!!!!! OH MY! maybe you'll see the people inside waving at you giving you the middle finger.... now that would be awesome.
Never trust a woman. FACT
The so-called Space Station is in fact located in Arizona......on the ground. FACT
And the telescope manufactuers is part of your sick conspiracy. FACT
I am in fact a quantum physicist. FACT
* edit * please provide the evidence to back up your facts (unsubstantiated claims)?
-
THERE'S A WOMAN IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION FILMING THE EARTH FOR YOU AND YOU STILL RESORT TO STUPID SENTENCES AND BAN THREATS !!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you all make me laugh... seriously... it's the 21st century, stop being retarded. The Earth is an oblate spheroid, FACT. There are people in a space station in orbit and they can observe it directly, FACT!
You can even BUY a freaking telescope and SEE the International Space Sation!!!!!!!!!!! OH MY! maybe you'll see the people inside waving at you giving you the middle finger.... now that would be awesome.
Never trust a woman. FACT
The so-called Space Station is in fact located in Arizona......on the ground. FACT
And the telescope manufactuers is part of your sick conspiracy. FACT
I am in fact a quantum physicist. FACT
where is the evidence to back up your facts (unsubstantiated) claims?
The proper phrasing is 'Please provide evidence for your outrageous claims'. You're growing up so fast :'(. ClockTower would be proud of you.
-
2. The shadow is caused by a, as yet undiscovered by modern astronomers, planetary body. Commonly referred to as the "anti moon." FAIL.
1. I was truly astounded to find that there is not one convincing image of the earth taken by any of the world's space agencies.
2. Where is the moon when lunar eclipses are going on, may I ask?
3. Whether an image is convincing is opinion, not objective fact. Since you have no basis for comparison, you can't gauge its level of realism.
-
10. "The planets that surround us are globular, so the earth is". - Er, no. Why does this follow? The earth is indeed unique. Earth is not the planets. It is the earth and is planar. IRRELEVANT.
9. "Time Zones." Time zones are real. The sun does move across the earth creating different time zones. This has absolutely no bearing on the shape of the earth. IRRELEVANT.
8. "The Coriolis Effect." The info on this youtube vid is incorrect. There have been many instances of right-turning hurricanes in the south, and visa versa. FAIL.
7. "Triangles." This is totally hypothetical and could never be demonstrated to prove anything about the true nature of the earth. Basically, this mathematical equation can not be applied in reality, so proves nothing. So, totally IRRELEVANT.
6. "The Sun." His explanation here is rushed and incomplete. He is talking about using triangulation to show that the earth has curvature. But he is WRONG.
5. "The Stars." Another rushed and incomplete explanation. I agree, the stars do move. Does this prove that the earth is a globe? Of course not. And most certainly does not in this video. FAIL.
4. "Magellan and Circumnavigation." Sailing in a circle on the planar earth does not prove that the earth is a globe. FAIL.
3."The Horizon." Search the Flat Earth Forums for complete views of the Toronto skyline across many miles of lake. Still not successfully debunked. FAIL.
2. "Lunar Eclipse." Again, this would take a lengthy explanation. But briefly, as he says, "the shadow on the moon is curved." So what is making the shadow? Vedic astrologers from thousands of years ago knew the truth. But today we live in ignorant times. The shadow is caused by a, as yet undiscovered by modern astronomers, planetary body. Commonly referred to as the "anti moon." FAIL.
1. "Photographic evidence." This is the best of the lot! This is what first got me really thinking that something is seriously wrong with the conventional view. I was truly astounded to find that there is not one convincing image of the earth taken by any of the world's space agencies.
Mizuki x
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
9- He was talking about the day-night terminator, if the earth was flat, then it would be a sphere, producing different time zone distribution. Fail
8- Yeah? Why it's incorrect? Just bother to google a little bit before making that statements. Instances? When and where? There's no such thing as that, the Coriolis effect is a proven fact. Fail
7- What are you talking about? He's saying that the sum of the 3 angles of a triangle is always 180°, so, walking in the directions we said, should form a triangle and we'll do a 180° turn if the earth was flat, but instead we do a 360° turn. Fail
6- That wasn't rushed, he explained it. You say it's wrong? prove it. You are just saying it's wrong without saying why it's wrong. Invalid point.
5- It does prove it, as he said, Orion is upside down in Australia in reference to Americas Orion view. Why? Because the earth is a globe, and America is _above_ Australia. Fail
4- It doesn't you are right, but why nobody has seen the earth's end? In a circle you can only circumnavigation in one direction, else you would fall from the edge.
3- Yeah, because the earth's radius is not that small, we can see pretty far. If the earth was flat, apart from the mountains and eye limitations, we could see farther than the skyline, plus we couldn't see double sunsets if we lay down and then stand up.
2- This made me laugh, yeah, it was discovered thousand years ago, now we have bettertechnology but we haven't discovered it, then how you know it exist? Another invalid argument without proof.
1- There are a LOT videos of people sending cameras to space using weather balloons, and remember that the first clear earth photo was taken in 1972, yeah, they totally edited that photo...
Conclusion: You are refuting actual evidence without consistent evidence, in fact none at all.
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
-
All of the objections in your videos are easily answered.
not really, you can't answer direct observation without making up ridiculous unproven conspiracy stuff. So no, the earth isn't flat, there is an immense universe out there, we've been to the moon and we have proof, evidence of all of it, unlike you guys.
Conspiracies are never right?
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
All the planets are different, and there is life on earth, why is that special? we could also say all the planets are special, i mean, is there other planet like mars?
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
From what I hear, Europa and Titan look promising too. Plus, we all know that the moon is chock full of bio- and/or sonoluminescent life forms, don't we?
In before moons are not planets.
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
From what I hear, Europa and Titan look promising too. Plus, we all know that the moon is chock full of bio- and/or sonoluminescent life forms, don't we?
In before moons are not planets.
Markjo, the point of that argument is that the Earth is special in RET as well.
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
From what I hear, Europa and Titan look promising too. Plus, we all know that the moon is chock full of bio- and/or sonoluminescent life forms, don't we?
In before moons are not planets.
Markjo, the point of that argument is that the Earth is special in RET as well.
Saying the earth is "special" is not an argument, is a subjective statement, what makes life more "special" than any other unique characteristics we may find on any random planet? And that has nothing to do with "RET"
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
From what I hear, Europa and Titan look promising too. Plus, we all know that the moon is chock full of bio- and/or sonoluminescent life forms, don't we?
In before moons are not planets.
Markjo, the point of that argument is that the Earth is special in RET as well.
Saying the earth is "special" is not an argument, is a subjective statement, what makes life more "special" than any other unique characteristics we may find on any random planet? And that has nothing to do with "RET"
This is the annoying stuff i hear philosophy minors spewing out all the time. "we aren't special." If you choose to devalue the simple fact that none of the "unique" characteristics on random planets can actually explain to you what a "subjective statement" is then there is no helping you.
Being humble is great, but we are more important than the lifeless rocks in this universe.
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
From what I hear, Europa and Titan look promising too. Plus, we all know that the moon is chock full of bio- and/or sonoluminescent life forms, don't we?
In before moons are not planets.
Markjo, the point of that argument is that the Earth is special in RET as well.
Saying the earth is "special" is not an argument, is a subjective statement, what makes life more "special" than any other unique characteristics we may find on any random planet? And that has nothing to do with "RET"
This is the annoying stuff i hear philosophy minors spewing out all the time. "we aren't special." If you choose to devalue the simple fact that none of the "unique" characteristics on random planets can actually explain to you what a "subjective statement" is then there is no helping you.
Being humble is great, but we are more important than the lifeless rocks in this universe.
Hear hear! What makes life more special than other unique characteristics we may find on any random planet? How about its mind-numbing complexity?
-
Markjo, the point of that argument is that the Earth is special in RET as well.
Some would contend that it is the height of egotism to believe that Earth is so special that it is the only place in the universe that supports life. The more that we explore the universe, more we begin to realize that maybe the Earth isn't so special after all.
-
Markjo, the point of that argument is that the Earth is special in RET as well.
Some would contend that it is the height of egotism to believe that Earth is so special that it is the only place in the universe that supports life. The more that we explore the universe, more we begin to realize that maybe the Earth isn't so special after all.
People always argue this egotistical point of view in all of the astro classes I take. I never got it. When you look up at the sky, it seems pretty clear that the sun, and not us, is moving. We can't feel the movement of the earth even in RET. Suddenly its egotistical to believe your senses?
As for their being no other life, If i believed in RET, i would believe in at a minimum the possible existence of extraterrestrials. But I never look back at our ancestors and said, wow, these guys were really self centered. they had never even left this rock. Nothing in this universe should have or could have mattered to them besides the earth.
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
From what I hear, Europa and Titan look promising too. Plus, we all know that the moon is chock full of bio- and/or sonoluminescent life forms, don't we?
In before moons are not planets.
Markjo, the point of that argument is that the Earth is special in RET as well.
Saying the earth is "special" is not an argument, is a subjective statement, what makes life more "special" than any other unique characteristics we may find on any random planet? And that has nothing to do with "RET"
This is the annoying stuff i hear philosophy minors spewing out all the time. "we aren't special." If you choose to devalue the simple fact that none of the "unique" characteristics on random planets can actually explain to you what a "subjective statement" is then there is no helping you.
Being humble is great, but we are more important than the lifeless rocks in this universe.
Hear hear! What makes life more special than other unique characteristics we may find on any random planet? How about its mind-numbing complexity?
Considering something special or not is subjective. But you have mentioned the factor that makes you consider life special, which is its complexity, the next time someone asks why the earth is flat instead of a sphere like other planets, you could also say "because it has more complexity",I don't see that as a good answer either, but maybe you do.
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
From what I hear, Europa and Titan look promising too. Plus, we all know that the moon is chock full of bio- and/or sonoluminescent life forms, don't we?
In before moons are not planets.
Markjo, the point of that argument is that the Earth is special in RET as well.
Saying the earth is "special" is not an argument, is a subjective statement, what makes life more "special" than any other unique characteristics we may find on any random planet? And that has nothing to do with "RET"
This is the annoying stuff i hear philosophy minors spewing out all the time. "we aren't special." If you choose to devalue the simple fact that none of the "unique" characteristics on random planets can actually explain to you what a "subjective statement" is then there is no helping you.
Being humble is great, but we are more important than the lifeless rocks in this universe.
Hear hear! What makes life more special than other unique characteristics we may find on any random planet? How about its mind-numbing complexity?
Considering something special or not is subjective. But you have mentioned the factor that makes you consider life special, which is its complexity, the next time someone asks why the earth is flat instead of a sphere like other planets, if you want an objective answer you could say "because it has more complexity",I don't see that as a good answer either, but maybe you do.
What are you talking about? Why would that factors that make life special have to be the same as the ones that make the earth special?
-
What are you talking about? Why would that factors that make life special have to be the same as the ones that make the earth special?
What are you talking about? Earth special? life special? this is not a philosophy forum (or is it?).
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
From what I hear, Europa and Titan look promising too. Plus, we all know that the moon is chock full of bio- and/or sonoluminescent life forms, don't we?
In before moons are not planets.
Markjo, the point of that argument is that the Earth is special in RET as well.
Saying the earth is "special" is not an argument, is a subjective statement, what makes life more "special" than any other unique characteristics we may find on any random planet? And that has nothing to do with "RET"
This is the annoying stuff i hear philosophy minors spewing out all the time. "we aren't special." If you choose to devalue the simple fact that none of the "unique" characteristics on random planets can actually explain to you what a "subjective statement" is then there is no helping you.
Being humble is great, but we are more important than the lifeless rocks in this universe.
Hear hear! What makes life more special than other unique characteristics we may find on any random planet? How about its mind-numbing complexity?
Considering something special or not is subjective. But you have mentioned the factor that makes you consider life special, which is its complexity, the next time someone asks why the earth is flat instead of a sphere like other planets, you could also say "because it has more complexity",I don't see that as a good answer either, but maybe you do.
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
-
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
Now you are talking about uniqueness besides complexity, see? those are more objective terms than specialness, but considering the size of the universe and how much have we explored it, even accepting nasa is not a conspiracy, I don't think we can rate life's uniqueness. But then according to you, thinking the moon is covered with it doesn't seem like a crazy idea, and then, who says the moon is a sphere, right? Now I just don't feel like we are talking about concrete things.
You also made a comment about how life being special is objective to any rational being, according to that, and according to OrbisNonSufficit, philosophy minors are not rational, how can that not be subjective?
-
What are you talking about? Why would that factors that make life special have to be the same as the ones that make the earth special?
What are you talking about? Earth special? life special? this is not a philosophy forum (or is it?).
seeing as life is on earth, I think its a little of both.,
-
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
Now you are talking about uniqueness besides complexity, see?
No, I'm not.
-
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
Now you are talking about uniqueness besides complexity, see?
No, I'm not.
Is the word besides the problem?
-
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
Now you are talking about uniqueness besides complexity, see? those are more objective terms than specialness, but considering the size of the universe and how much have we explored it, even accepting nasa is not a conspiracy, I don't think we can rate life's uniqueness. But then according to you, thinking the moon is covered with it doesn't seem like a crazy idea, and then, who says the moon is a sphere, right? Now I just don't feel like we are talking about concrete things.
You also made a comment about how life being special is objective to any rational being, according to that, and according to OrbisNonSufficit, philosophy minors are not rational, how can that not be subjective?
Are you seriously asking how philosophy minors could be irrational?
-
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
Now you are talking about uniqueness besides complexity, see? those are more objective terms than specialness, but considering the size of the universe and how much have we explored it, even accepting nasa is not a conspiracy, I don't think we can rate life's uniqueness. But then according to you, thinking the moon is covered with it doesn't seem like a crazy idea, and then, who says the moon is a sphere, right? Now I just don't feel like we are talking about concrete things.
You also made a comment about how life being special is objective to any rational being, according to that, and according to OrbisNonSufficit, philosophy minors are not rational, how can that not be subjective?
Are you seriously asking how philosophy minors could be irrational?
You don't seem to understand what I say most of the time, I would like you to read again my last sentence and try to figure out for yourself what was I saying, its not a complex sentence or anything, but I wouldn't like to derail more the thread. If you still don't understand it, or still understand the same thing, you can send me a private message.
The short answer is no.
-
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
Now you are talking about uniqueness besides complexity, see? those are more objective terms than specialness, but considering the size of the universe and how much have we explored it, even accepting nasa is not a conspiracy, I don't think we can rate life's uniqueness. But then according to you, thinking the moon is covered with it doesn't seem like a crazy idea, and then, who says the moon is a sphere, right? Now I just don't feel like we are talking about concrete things.
You also made a comment about how life being special is objective to any rational being, according to that, and according to OrbisNonSufficit, philosophy minors are not rational, how can that not be subjective?
Are you seriously asking how philosophy minors could be irrational?
You don't seem to understand what I say most of the time, I would like you to read again my last sentence and try to figure out for yourself what was I saying, its not a complex sentence or anything, but I wouldn't like to derail more the thread. If you still don't understand it, or still understand the same thing, you can send me a private message.
The short answer is no.
I understand that you are trying to make the argument that Being special is subjective, I just fail to see what it has to do with the earth being special. Since we are the creatures that came up with the concept of "special", its pretty clear that we are in fact special.
-
I understand that you are trying to make the argument that Being special is subjective, I just fail to see what it has to do with the earth being special. Since we are the creatures that came up with the concept of "special", its pretty clear that we are in fact special.
Since special is a very subjective term, you need to specify what you mean by saying the earth is special. It's pretty clear that we are special? what you said a few posts before seems to imply its not pretty clear.
This is the annoying stuff i hear philosophy minors spewing out all the time. "we aren't special."
Before you ask, did I say the earth is NOT special? no. Did I say the earth is special? no. Did I say philosophy minors are right? no. Did I say you are wrong about saying the earth is special? no.
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
All the planets are different, and there is life on earth, why is that special? we could also say all the planets are special, i mean, is there other planet like mars?
I'm glad that you reiterated my point. I can sometimes be too subtle for the slower people on this site.
-
I understand that you are trying to make the argument that Being special is subjective, I just fail to see what it has to do with the earth being special. Since we are the creatures that came up with the concept of "special", its pretty clear that we are in fact special.
This is the kind of cheap philosophy or word game that makes a site like this one possible. Contemplate two scenarios: the one in which you attribute the word "special" to life, or to Earth, or to the color of your mother's hair. And the one in which each of these things is called "common".
The two scenarios are exactly the same. You will not have a different set of knowledge to understand them, you will not have different laws to explain physics or biology or even psychology. In short, you have nothing new, except maybe something to talk with friends.
-
I understand that you are trying to make the argument that Being special is subjective, I just fail to see what it has to do with the earth being special. Since we are the creatures that came up with the concept of "special", its pretty clear that we are in fact special.
This is the kind of cheap philosophy or word game that makes a site like this one possible. Contemplate two scenarios: the one in which you attribute the word "special" to life, or to Earth, or to the color of your mother's hair. And the one in which each of these things is called "common".
The two scenarios are exactly the same. You will not have a different set of knowledge to understand them, you will not have different laws to explain physics or biology or even psychology. In short, you have nothing new, except maybe something to talk with friends.
Yes, if you read that post on its own without the context of the rest of the thread you are right. Luckily, not all of us are dumb enough to just read one post.
-
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
Now you are talking about uniqueness besides complexity, see?
No, I'm not.
Is the word besides the problem?
Not particularly that I can see. It's just an incorrect statement.
-
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
Now you are talking about uniqueness besides complexity, see?
No, I'm not.
It is true that you were talking about uniqueness because you used the word unique, and you also talk about complexity. So I could only assume your problem is with the word "besides".
-
I understand that you are trying to make the argument that Being special is subjective, I just fail to see what it has to do with the earth being special. Since we are the creatures that came up with the concept of "special", its pretty clear that we are in fact special.
This is the kind of cheap philosophy or word game that makes a site like this one possible. Contemplate two scenarios: the one in which you attribute the word "special" to life, or to Earth, or to the color of your mother's hair. And the one in which each of these things is called "common".
The two scenarios are exactly the same. You will not have a different set of knowledge to understand them, you will not have different laws to explain physics or biology or even psychology. In short, you have nothing new, except maybe something to talk with friends.
Something about these scenarios is bothering me. The first being that my mom's hair color is not special. In fact, many many people on earth have it.
In the second scenario, Life, which I have not been talking about generally, i have been talking about intelligent life, gets labeled as common. Seeing as how most scientists in RET don't think this is biologically likely, I would say that it appears that you have something new if you believe this to be the case.
Lets just be frank. In RET, the evolution of intelligent life is a rare and special even for the earth. Even if there are many other intelligent beings out there, the ratio of them to the number of planets total would be minuscule, thereby making it special.
And I am pretty sure that the world of RET scientists would agree with me, even if they don't do so currently. If you honestly believe that the discovery of a new planet would carry as much wieght as the discover of a new type of life form, intelligent or not (and if intelligent then bygolly) then you are just buying into this subjective mumbojumbo too much.
Of course being special is subjective to what humans think is special, but should we try to make it subjective to what rocks or planets think? By our definition of special, Intelligent life is just that. This makes the earth just as special, as it is the home of intelligent life.
-
Markjo, the point of that argument is that the Earth is special in RET as well.
Some would contend that it is the height of egotism to believe that Earth is so special that it is the only place in the universe that supports life. The more that we explore the universe, more we begin to realize that maybe the Earth isn't so special after all.
People always argue this egotistical point of view in all of the astro classes I take. I never got it. When you look up at the sky, it seems pretty clear that the sun, and not us, is moving. We can't feel the movement of the earth even in RET. Suddenly its egotistical to believe your senses?
Agreed, at first glance, geocentrism does seem to make more sense than heliocentrism. However, the egotism kicks in when you start to believe that your senses alone are sufficient to determine the true nature of the universe.
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
All the planets are different, and there is life on earth, why is that special? we could also say all the planets are special, i mean, is there other planet like mars?
I'm glad that you reiterated my point. I can sometimes be too subtle for the slower people on this site.
That's the point, all planets are different BUT they share characteristics, one of those is the shape, all planets tends round due to gravity, so, astronomers said "If all planets and stars are round, then earth should be round to", then we got some experiments to prove that, and today we have videos and images, but some of you think they are fake. Why? why the need to go against scientific proof? It's not that I have been spoon feed as you say "RE's Believe everything science tell them", That's not true, we believe it because it have been proved, the scientific method was invented for that porpoise, to prove things with solid evidence before affirming them.
-
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
Now you are talking about uniqueness besides complexity, see?
No, I'm not.
It is true that you were talking about uniqueness because you used the word unique, and you also talk about complexity. So I could only assume your problem is with the word "besides".
If you carefully read the part you bolded above you may be able to discern where you are mistaken about what I'm talking about. This is getting a bit tedious.
-
Agreed, at first glance, geocentrism does seem to make more sense than heliocentrism. However, the egotism kicks in when you start to believe that your senses alone are sufficient to determine the true nature of the universe.
If one's senses are insufficient to determine the true nature of the universe, to what purpose is the study of it at all? ???
-
Well, the lifeless rocks might think differently if they were capable of an opinion, but any rational living thing would surely agree that life's complexity makes it unique enough in the universe to consider it special, even in an objective sense.
Now you are talking about uniqueness besides complexity, see?
No, I'm not.
It is true that you were talking about uniqueness because you used the word unique, and you also talk about complexity. So I could only assume your problem is with the word "besides".
If you carefully read the part you bolded above you may be able to discern where you are mistaken about what I'm talking about. This is getting a bit tedious.
Life complexity makes it unique enough to be considered special, you are talking about how complexity makes life unique. I agree Its tedious, maybe the next time you will explain yourself when correcting someone to avoid this.
Also, I don't see how the phrase you quoted invalidates the rest of my comment by being incorrect, you still gave life the property of being unique.
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
All the planets are different, and there is life on earth, why is that special? we could also say all the planets are special, i mean, is there other planet like mars?
I'm glad that you reiterated my point. I can sometimes be too subtle for the slower people on this site.
That's the point, all planets are different
Thank you for repeating my point a third time.
-
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Oh cool, there really must be live on Mars then! Quickly, tell NASA!
All the planets are different, and there is life on earth, why is that special? we could also say all the planets are special, i mean, is there other planet like mars?
I'm glad that you reiterated my point. I can sometimes be too subtle for the slower people on this site.
That's the point, all planets are different
Thank you for repeating my point a third time.
I think he might have used capital letters in the "but" because it was an important part of his point.
-
All of the objections in your videos are easily answered.
Of course they are. After all, FET is a religious dogma. Religious dogma are always backed by infalsifiable comebacks selected conveniently over years of arguing and figuring out where the gaping logical holes are in their beliefs whenever someone points them out. So anything you could ever do to prove them wrong is instantly dismissed and put in the category of the appropriate comeback. They also do notoriously little independent research to support their theories while claiming large-scale conspiracies against them, playing the victim role and acting like they are persecuted despite producing nil when it comes to actual peer-reviewed data.
Science is not a conspiracy. It is a body of some of the most honest, open, and curious truth-seekers there are.
-
All of the objections in your videos are easily answered.
Science is not a conspiracy. It is a body of some of the most honest, open, and curious truth-seekers there are.
No one said science is a conspiracy.
-
I understand that you are trying to make the argument that Being special is subjective, I just fail to see what it has to do with the earth being special. Since we are the creatures that came up with the concept of "special", its pretty clear that we are in fact special.
This is the kind of cheap philosophy or word game that makes a site like this one possible. Contemplate two scenarios: the one in which you attribute the word "special" to life, or to Earth, or to the color of your mother's hair. And the one in which each of these things is called "common".
The two scenarios are exactly the same. You will not have a different set of knowledge to understand them, you will not have different laws to explain physics or biology or even psychology. In short, you have nothing new, except maybe something to talk with friends.
Something about these scenarios is bothering me. The first being that my mom's hair color is not special. In fact, many many people on earth have it.
In the second scenario, Life, which I have not been talking about generally, i have been talking about intelligent life, gets labeled as common. Seeing as how most scientists in RET don't think this is biologically likely, I would say that it appears that you have something new if you believe this to be the case.
Lets just be frank. In RET, the evolution of intelligent life is a rare and special even for the earth. Even if there are many other intelligent beings out there, the ratio of them to the number of planets total would be minuscule, thereby making it special.
And I am pretty sure that the world of RET scientists would agree with me, even if they don't do so currently. If you honestly believe that the discovery of a new planet would carry as much wieght as the discover of a new type of life form, intelligent or not (and if intelligent then bygolly) then you are just buying into this subjective mumbojumbo too much.
Of course being special is subjective to what humans think is special, but should we try to make it subjective to what rocks or planets think? By our definition of special, Intelligent life is just that. This makes the earth just as special, as it is the home of intelligent life.
See? A whole four more paragraphs of empty words. Considering something as "special" is just an empty sentimental feeling that changes nothing.
Besides, you are now adding another empty argument: intelligent life in contrast with some kind of other life. Are you saying that "intelligent" means "human"? Or are you prepared to accept that all life, with the possible exception of virus and prions (which, by the way, are not considered as alive by many scientists) is at least somewhat intelligent?
Since you do not have a clear definition of intelligence, declaring something as intelligent is just as inane as declaring it special. Whatever you consider special, others consider common. Whatever you consider intelligent, others consider non-intelligent. And science does not advance with either.
-
I understand that you are trying to make the argument that Being special is subjective, I just fail to see what it has to do with the earth being special. Since we are the creatures that came up with the concept of "special", its pretty clear that we are in fact special.
This is the kind of cheap philosophy or word game that makes a site like this one possible. Contemplate two scenarios: the one in which you attribute the word "special" to life, or to Earth, or to the color of your mother's hair. And the one in which each of these things is called "common".
The two scenarios are exactly the same. You will not have a different set of knowledge to understand them, you will not have different laws to explain physics or biology or even psychology. In short, you have nothing new, except maybe something to talk with friends.
Something about these scenarios is bothering me. The first being that my mom's hair color is not special. In fact, many many people on earth have it.
In the second scenario, Life, which I have not been talking about generally, i have been talking about intelligent life, gets labeled as common. Seeing as how most scientists in RET don't think this is biologically likely, I would say that it appears that you have something new if you believe this to be the case.
Lets just be frank. In RET, the evolution of intelligent life is a rare and special even for the earth. Even if there are many other intelligent beings out there, the ratio of them to the number of planets total would be minuscule, thereby making it special.
And I am pretty sure that the world of RET scientists would agree with me, even if they don't do so currently. If you honestly believe that the discovery of a new planet would carry as much wieght as the discover of a new type of life form, intelligent or not (and if intelligent then bygolly) then you are just buying into this subjective mumbojumbo too much.
Of course being special is subjective to what humans think is special, but should we try to make it subjective to what rocks or planets think? By our definition of special, Intelligent life is just that. This makes the earth just as special, as it is the home of intelligent life.
See? A whole four more paragraphs of empty words. Considering something as "special" is just an empty sentimental feeling that changes nothing.
Besides, you are now adding another empty argument: intelligent life in contrast with some kind of other life. Are you saying that "intelligent" means "human"? Or are you prepared to accept that all life, with the possible exception of virus and prions (which, by the way, are not considered as alive by many scientists) is at least somewhat intelligent?
Since you do not have a clear definition of intelligence, declaring something as intelligent is just as inane as declaring it special. Whatever you consider special, others consider common. Whatever you consider intelligent, others consider non-intelligent. And science does not advance with either.
Not to mention this whole discussion of special is being tainted by the FE fallaciously applying logic. They say, earth is special, there's life on it! Therefore, its allowed to be special in shape! Ah ha!
-
I understand that you are trying to make the argument that Being special is subjective, I just fail to see what it has to do with the earth being special. Since we are the creatures that came up with the concept of "special", its pretty clear that we are in fact special.
This is the kind of cheap philosophy or word game that makes a site like this one possible. Contemplate two scenarios: the one in which you attribute the word "special" to life, or to Earth, or to the color of your mother's hair. And the one in which each of these things is called "common".
The two scenarios are exactly the same. You will not have a different set of knowledge to understand them, you will not have different laws to explain physics or biology or even psychology. In short, you have nothing new, except maybe something to talk with friends.
Something about these scenarios is bothering me. The first being that my mom's hair color is not special. In fact, many many people on earth have it.
In the second scenario, Life, which I have not been talking about generally, i have been talking about intelligent life, gets labeled as common. Seeing as how most scientists in RET don't think this is biologically likely, I would say that it appears that you have something new if you believe this to be the case.
Lets just be frank. In RET, the evolution of intelligent life is a rare and special even for the earth. Even if there are many other intelligent beings out there, the ratio of them to the number of planets total would be minuscule, thereby making it special.
And I am pretty sure that the world of RET scientists would agree with me, even if they don't do so currently. If you honestly believe that the discovery of a new planet would carry as much wieght as the discover of a new type of life form, intelligent or not (and if intelligent then bygolly) then you are just buying into this subjective mumbojumbo too much.
Of course being special is subjective to what humans think is special, but should we try to make it subjective to what rocks or planets think? By our definition of special, Intelligent life is just that. This makes the earth just as special, as it is the home of intelligent life.
See? A whole four more paragraphs of empty words. Considering something as "special" is just an empty sentimental feeling that changes nothing.
Besides, you are now adding another empty argument: intelligent life in contrast with some kind of other life. Are you saying that "intelligent" means "human"? Or are you prepared to accept that all life, with the possible exception of virus and prions (which, by the way, are not considered as alive by many scientists) is at least somewhat intelligent?
Since you do not have a clear definition of intelligence, declaring something as intelligent is just as inane as declaring it special. Whatever you consider special, others consider common. Whatever you consider intelligent, others consider non-intelligent. And science does not advance with either.
Not to mention this whole discussion of special is being tainted by the FE fallaciously applying logic. They say, earth is special, there's life on it! Therefore, its allowed to be special in shape! Ah ha!
That's not how it goes. REers say earth is not special. We show why the earth is special. For extra information go to www.rif.org (http://www.rif.org) and reread this thread.
-
Again, you completely miss the point.
The earth is debatably special in the sense that its currently the only place we have found life. But it IS NOT special compared to other observable celestial bodies in any other way.
What you are arguing is that because your hair color is hot pink, and special because of the color (which is debatable), you are a special human being that was formed by a different process as other humans, and not susceptible to the laws of other humans. The latter may very well be true, but it does not follow from the specialness of your hair color.
-
What you are arguing is that because your hair color is hot pink, and special because of the color (which is debatable), you are a special human being that was formed by a different process as other humans, and not susceptible to the laws of other humans. The latter may very well be true, but it does not follow from the specialness of your hair color.
What you are arguing is that because we have hair we must be exactly the same as an elephant, because they also have hair.
-
What you are arguing is that because your hair color is hot pink, and special because of the color (which is debatable), you are a special human being that was formed by a different process as other humans, and not susceptible to the laws of other humans. The latter may very well be true, but it does not follow from the specialness of your hair color.
What you are arguing is that because we have hair we must be exactly the same as an elephant, because they also have hair.
Hardly. What we are arguing is: Every observable human has hair. I have am a human, so I must have hair.
Every observable planet is a sphere. Earth is a planet. It follows that earth is a sphere, in the absence of other evidence. However, we have mounds of evidence that support earth being an oblate spheroid.
-
That's not how it goes. REers say earth is not special. We show why the earth is special.
Not all "RE'ers" say Earth is not special. And not all "RE'ers" say Earth is special. It is just an inane discussion. Whatever you want to say when you talk about Earth being special is totally useless.
If intelligent life is a measure of the "special" quality of Earth, we have no evidence whatsoever that there are no extraterrestrials a million times more intelligent than us. We could be as "common" as ants, or even amoebas when compared with some extraterrestrials. Or we could be the kings of the universe. We just don't have evidence of either.
And on the other hand, since you have no evidence whatsoever towards FE "theories", you cannot use it to demonstrate that we are "special".
Whatever your approach, neither the word "special" nor the word "intelligent" take us any closer to any truth.
-
I understand that you are trying to make the argument that Being special is subjective, I just fail to see what it has to do with the earth being special. Since we are the creatures that came up with the concept of "special", its pretty clear that we are in fact special.
This is the kind of cheap philosophy or word game that makes a site like this one possible. Contemplate two scenarios: the one in which you attribute the word "special" to life, or to Earth, or to the color of your mother's hair. And the one in which each of these things is called "common".
The two scenarios are exactly the same. You will not have a different set of knowledge to understand them, you will not have different laws to explain physics or biology or even psychology. In short, you have nothing new, except maybe something to talk with friends.
Something about these scenarios is bothering me. The first being that my mom's hair color is not special. In fact, many many people on earth have it.
In the second scenario, Life, which I have not been talking about generally, i have been talking about intelligent life, gets labeled as common. Seeing as how most scientists in RET don't think this is biologically likely, I would say that it appears that you have something new if you believe this to be the case.
Lets just be frank. In RET, the evolution of intelligent life is a rare and special even for the earth. Even if there are many other intelligent beings out there, the ratio of them to the number of planets total would be minuscule, thereby making it special.
And I am pretty sure that the world of RET scientists would agree with me, even if they don't do so currently. If you honestly believe that the discovery of a new planet would carry as much wieght as the discover of a new type of life form, intelligent or not (and if intelligent then bygolly) then you are just buying into this subjective mumbojumbo too much.
Of course being special is subjective to what humans think is special, but should we try to make it subjective to what rocks or planets think? By our definition of special, Intelligent life is just that. This makes the earth just as special, as it is the home of intelligent life.
See? A whole four more paragraphs of empty words. Considering something as "special" is just an empty sentimental feeling that changes nothing.
Besides, you are now adding another empty argument: intelligent life in contrast with some kind of other life. Are you saying that "intelligent" means "human"? Or are you prepared to accept that all life, with the possible exception of virus and prions (which, by the way, are not considered as alive by many scientists) is at least somewhat intelligent?
Since you do not have a clear definition of intelligence, declaring something as intelligent is just as inane as declaring it special. Whatever you consider special, others consider common. Whatever you consider intelligent, others consider non-intelligent. And science does not advance with either.
Do scientists normally make this many assumptions? So I have a number of problems again with your incredibly dumb post. My only argument has and will be for this thread a response to someone claiming that the earth was not special. If you look at the definition of special, the earth is clearly special.
1.) I never said being special changed anything, All I said is that the earth is in fact special. I also said that there were other factors that differentiated it from the other planets in RET.
2.)"intelligent life in contrast with some kind of other life" - this is not an argument, and I certainly did not say this.
3.)Since you do not have a clear definition of intelligence - Not providing and not having are two very different things. Stop making assumptions.
-
@Beorn: Let me simplify my logic: "All humans are different, but, still, they are humans" We can categorize objects because shared characteristics, if the earth if flat, it is not a planet and it's breaking the laws of gravity, maybe that can happen, we don't know, but the evidence tell us that's not the case.
-
Do scientists normally make this many assumptions? So I have a number of problems again with your incredibly dumb post. My only argument has and will be for this thread a response to someone claiming that the earth was not special. If you look at the definition of special, the earth is clearly special.
1.) I never said being special changed anything, All I said is that the earth is in fact special. I also said that there were other factors that differentiated it from the other planets in RET.
2.)"intelligent life in contrast with some kind of other life" - this is not an argument, and I certainly did not say this.
3.)Since you do not have a clear definition of intelligence - Not providing and not having are two very different things. Stop making assumptions.
So, all this discussion is about nothing. "Special" means nothing, since it changes nothing. And "intelligent" means nothing since you don't even have a definition of it.
At least now I know you like to wrangle endlessly about nothing, making any discussion a waste of time.
-
Do scientists normally make this many assumptions? So I have a number of problems again with your incredibly dumb post. My only argument has and will be for this thread a response to someone claiming that the earth was not special. If you look at the definition of special, the earth is clearly special.
1.) I never said being special changed anything, All I said is that the earth is in fact special. I also said that there were other factors that differentiated it from the other planets in RET.
2.)"intelligent life in contrast with some kind of other life" - this is not an argument, and I certainly did not say this.
3.)Since you do not have a clear definition of intelligence - Not providing and not having are two very different things. Stop making assumptions.
So, all this discussion is about nothing. "Special" means nothing, since it changes nothing. And "intelligent" means nothing since you don't even have a definition of it.
At least now I know you like to wrangle endlessly about nothing, making any discussion a waste of time.
You mean pointlessly critiquing something did not prove fruitful for you? Are you asking for me to define intelligent or do you just want to keep assuming I don't have one?
Someone else brought up the earth not being special, so why don't you attack them for bringing up something pointless instead of attacking me?
-
Agreed, at first glance, geocentrism does seem to make more sense than heliocentrism. However, the egotism kicks in when you start to believe that your senses alone are sufficient to determine the true nature of the universe.
If one's senses are insufficient to determine the true nature of the universe, to what purpose is the study of it at all? ???
Well, obviously to answer the age old question (in the immortal words of V'ger) "Is there nothing more?"
-
Do scientists normally make this many assumptions? So I have a number of problems again with your incredibly dumb post. My only argument has and will be for this thread a response to someone claiming that the earth was not special. If you look at the definition of special, the earth is clearly special.
1.) I never said being special changed anything, All I said is that the earth is in fact special. I also said that there were other factors that differentiated it from the other planets in RET.
2.)"intelligent life in contrast with some kind of other life" - this is not an argument, and I certainly did not say this.
3.)Since you do not have a clear definition of intelligence - Not providing and not having are two very different things. Stop making assumptions.
So, all this discussion is about nothing. "Special" means nothing, since it changes nothing. And "intelligent" means nothing since you don't even have a definition of it.
At least now I know you like to wrangle endlessly about nothing, making any discussion a waste of time.
You mean pointlessly critiquing something did not prove fruitful for you? Are you asking for me to define intelligent or do you just want to keep assuming I don't have one?
Someone else brought up the earth not being special, so why don't you attack them for bringing up something pointless instead of attacking me?
Do you mean me? when did I say the earth is not special? I said, saying it is special is a subjective statement, i did so to try to get more concrete answers from part of flat earthers about the question (why are all planets spheres and the earth is not) but it clearly didn't work because all i got was a discussion of how the earth is in fact, special. I could not care less if you want to say the earth is special and my objective was not to argue about that.
-
Do scientists normally make this many assumptions? So I have a number of problems again with your incredibly dumb post. My only argument has and will be for this thread a response to someone claiming that the earth was not special. If you look at the definition of special, the earth is clearly special.
1.) I never said being special changed anything, All I said is that the earth is in fact special. I also said that there were other factors that differentiated it from the other planets in RET.
2.)"intelligent life in contrast with some kind of other life" - this is not an argument, and I certainly did not say this.
3.)Since you do not have a clear definition of intelligence - Not providing and not having are two very different things. Stop making assumptions.
So, all this discussion is about nothing. "Special" means nothing, since it changes nothing. And "intelligent" means nothing since you don't even have a definition of it.
At least now I know you like to wrangle endlessly about nothing, making any discussion a waste of time.
You mean pointlessly critiquing something did not prove fruitful for you? Are you asking for me to define intelligent or do you just want to keep assuming I don't have one?
Someone else brought up the earth not being special, so why don't you attack them for bringing up something pointless instead of attacking me?
Do you mean me? when did I say the earth is not special? I said, saying it is special is a subjective statement, i did so to try to get more concrete answers from part of flat earthers about the question (why are all planets spheres and the earth is not) but it clearly didn't work because all i got was a discussion of how the earth is in fact, special. I could not care less if you want to say the earth is special and my objective was not to argue about that.
No I don't mean you.
10- Why the earth is special? There's no proof that it's different from other planets. Fail
Lets all keep jumping to conclusions, its going extremely well.
-
That's not how it goes. REers say earth is not special. We show why the earth is special.
Not all "RE'ers" say Earth is not special. And not all "RE'ers" say Earth is special. It is just an inane discussion. Whatever you want to say when you talk about Earth being special is totally useless.
Irrelevant, a REer brought it up, we put points up against it. Don't hijack threads if you feel that an REer says something you disagree with.
If intelligent life is a measure of the "special" quality of Earth, we have no evidence whatsoever that there are no extraterrestrials a million times more intelligent than us.
Irrelevant, we know where there definitely isn't extraterrestrial and frankly, that's a big area. Even if there is more intelligent life around we are still special
We could be as "common" as ants, or even amoebas when compared with some extraterrestrials. Or we could be the kings of the universe. We just don't have evidence of either.
Incorrect, we could be as common as ants if there are LOTS of other intelligent lifeforms. If there is just one that is a lot smarter than us, we're still special.
And on the other hand, since you have no evidence whatsoever towards FE "theories", you cannot use it to demonstrate that we are "special".
Incorrect, from an RE viewpoint we are still special.
Whatever your approach, neither the word "special" nor the word "intelligent" take us any closer to any truth.
Tell that to the REers who say that Earth must be round because we are not special.
-
Greetings everyone. I am enjoying the discussion.
-
Whatever your approach, neither the word "special" nor the word "intelligent" take us any closer to any truth.
Tell that to the REers who say that Earth must be round because we are not special.
I will tell it to any scientist you can find who would make such a claim... which is... no real scientist whatsoever.
Search each and every scientific article, each and every scientist's opinion, and you will not find one who uses the argument that life, or humanity, or Earth is "special" (or "not special") and therefore Earth is round.
The ones who use this "we are special and therefore we are <place your favorite claim here>" are the religious fundamentalists who take the claim of humanity's special status from the bible. Are you one of them?
-
The total number of planets in our solar system that is similar to Earth in observable composition, surface temperature, gravity, moon count, and color is 0.
Therefore the Earth is unique in our solar system. Since our ability to scan other solar systems for comparison is weak, then we can ignore these as comparisons due to lack of evidence.
Since the Earth is unique in our known area, we can then say that the Earth is special.
-
The total number of planets in our solar system that is similar to Earth in observable composition, surface temperature, gravity, moon count, and color is 0.
Therefore the Earth is unique in our solar system. Since our ability to scan other solar systems for comparison is weak, then we can ignore these as comparisons due to lack of evidence.
Since the Earth is unique in our known area, we can then say that the Earth is special.
My car has plate number EWK432. There is no other car that I have seen which has the same plate. I have no way to go to any other country to check whether there are more cars with the same plate. Therefore I consider my car as "special". Have I gained something with my argument?
The only ones who gain something (or at least try) with the classification of humanity or Earth as "special" are the biblical literalists who cannot accept that God might have created men or something similar in another planet, and not tell us about that in the Bible.
In science the "special" or similar classifications were once used a long time ago, for example when we classified animals as wild or domestic, and useful or harmful. But science has matured a lot since then. Now the only example of the word "special" in science is in Relativity, where the meaning has a totally different connotation.
-
My car has plate number EWK432. There is no other car that I have seen which has the same plate. I have no way to go to any other country to check whether there are more cars with the same plate. Therefore I consider my car as "special". Have I gained something with my argument?
No, that's a dreadful analogy. By comparison of statistical odds it would be a great surprise if your number plate was not EWK432. Also, number plates are sequentially allocated. The properties of planets are not.
-
I think the RE'ers are still missing the point of the argument. God, this is as bad as a political debate. The point isn't 'The Earth is flat because it's special lol'. The point is 'Yeah, the Earth is different. So what?'
-
I think the RE'ers are still missing the point of the argument. God, this is as bad as a political debate. The point isn't 'The Earth is flat because it's special lol'. The point is 'Yeah, the Earth is different. So what?'
Yeah, the earth is different (fourth time repeating this), but it's still a planet, you know planets are round due to gravity, so a planet can't be round, or who knows, we humans don't know everything, but, until we have solid evidence that a planet can be flat, then we can say that planets can be flat. Even before telescopes, scientist knew that the earth was round. I'm not up to date with your explanation of gravity, so argue with me.
-
I think the RE'ers are still missing the point of the argument. God, this is as bad as a political debate. The point isn't 'The Earth is flat because it's special lol'. The point is 'Yeah, the Earth is different. So what?'
Yeah, the earth is different (fourth time repeating this), but it's still a planet, you know planets are round due to gravity, so a planet can't be round, or who knows, we humans don't know everything, but, until we have solid evidence that a planet can be flat, then we can say that planets can be flat. Even before telescopes, scientist knew that the earth was round. I'm not up to date with your explanation of gravity, so argue with me.
That's if you already accept the science of RET as true, which we obviously don't. It's begging the question to say that it's evidence for RET in itself.
-
I think the RE'ers are still missing the point of the argument. God, this is as bad as a political debate. The point isn't 'The Earth is flat because it's special lol'. The point is 'Yeah, the Earth is different. So what?'
Yeah, the earth is different (fourth time repeating this), but it's still a planet, you know planets are round due to gravity, so a planet can't be round, or who knows, we humans don't know everything, but, until we have solid evidence that a planet can be flat, then we can say that planets can be flat. Even before telescopes, scientist knew that the earth was round. I'm not up to date with your explanation of gravity, so argue with me.
Petitio principii. Your argument is that the Earth must be a planet because it's the same as all of the other planets, and it must be the same as all of the others because it's a planet. Please actually demonstrate one or both of these statements to be true independently of the other.
In Flat Earth Theory, gravity is non-existent. Instead there is a Universal Acceleration. Learn more at http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=UA (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=UA)
-
I found this on youtube. It explains everything so very clearly.
If you are able give me a reason why all 10 of these reasons aren't true I'll be a believer
Have you even read the FAQ? I doubt so, because literally every single one of those "reasons" are addressed in it.
-
Your argument is that the Earth must be a planet because it's the same as all of the other planets, and it must be the same as all of the others because it's a planet.
This is called a Strawman. You cannot argue the opposition's argument, so you dilute it to a point where you can argue it. In this case, it is even worse than a Strawman because you do not dilute it, you totally change it.
Show us where anyone opposing you has ever said what you are claiming. Or be intellectually honest and make an argument against the real claims of the other side.
-
I think the RE'ers are still missing the point of the argument. God, this is as bad as a political debate. The point isn't 'The Earth is flat because it's special lol'. The point is 'Yeah, the Earth is different. So what?'
Yeah, the earth is different (fourth time repeating this), but it's still a planet, you know planets are round due to gravity, so a planet can't be round, or who knows, we humans don't know everything, but, until we have solid evidence that a planet can be flat, then we can say that planets can be flat. Even before telescopes, scientist knew that the earth was round. I'm not up to date with your explanation of gravity, so argue with me.
Petitio principii. Your argument is that the Earth must be a planet because it's the same as all of the other planets, and it must be the same as all of the others because it's a planet. Please actually demonstrate one or both of these statements to be true independently of the other.
In Flat Earth Theory, gravity is non-existent. Instead there is a Universal Acceleration. Learn more at http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=UA (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=UA)
I assume that earth is round because other planets are round (Apart from other evidence you quote as fake), so, we have to prove that earth is a different case to say it's flat. I read the UA article, but then, how we orbit around the sun? Or in earth-center-of-universe case. how other bodies orbit around us?
-
I think the RE'ers are still missing the point of the argument. God, this is as bad as a political debate. The point isn't 'The Earth is flat because it's special lol'. The point is 'Yeah, the Earth is different. So what?'
Yeah, the earth is different (fourth time repeating this), but it's still a planet, you know planets are round due to gravity, so a planet can't be round, or who knows, we humans don't know everything, but, until we have solid evidence that a planet can be flat, then we can say that planets can be flat. Even before telescopes, scientist knew that the earth was round. I'm not up to date with your explanation of gravity, so argue with me.
Petitio principii. Your argument is that the Earth must be a planet because it's the same as all of the other planets, and it must be the same as all of the others because it's a planet. Please actually demonstrate one or both of these statements to be true independently of the other.
In Flat Earth Theory, gravity is non-existent. Instead there is a Universal Acceleration. Learn more at http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=UA (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=UA)
I assume that earth is round because other planets are round (Apart from other evidence you quote as fake), so, we have to prove that earth is a different case to say it's flat. I read the UA article, but then, how we orbit around the sun? Or in earth-center-of-universe case. how other bodies orbit around us?
I'll address you first, since you're actually polite and likeable. The other bodies do not orbit the Earth. Instead, they follow an orbit directly above the Earth. Here's a diagram showing the path of the Sun, for example (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/images/a/a1/Seasons.png)
Your argument is that the Earth must be a planet because it's the same as all of the other planets, and it must be the same as all of the others because it's a planet.
This is called a Strawman. You cannot argue the opposition's argument, so you dilute it to a point where you can argue it. In this case, it is even worse than a Strawman because you do not dilute it, you totally change it.
Show us where anyone opposing you has ever said what you are claiming. Or be intellectually honest and make an argument against the real claims of the other side.
Rereading, it appears that it's actually different people making those points. lmb32 said the one, you said the other. So I retract that particular point. However, it wasn't a straw man.
-
I think the RE'ers are still missing the point of the argument. God, this is as bad as a political debate. The point isn't 'The Earth is flat because it's special lol'. The point is 'Yeah, the Earth is different. So what?'
Yeah, the earth is different (fourth time repeating this), but it's still a planet, you know planets are round due to gravity, so a planet can't be round, or who knows, we humans don't know everything, but, until we have solid evidence that a planet can be flat, then we can say that planets can be flat. Even before telescopes, scientist knew that the earth was round. I'm not up to date with your explanation of gravity, so argue with me.
Petitio principii. Your argument is that the Earth must be a planet because it's the same as all of the other planets, and it must be the same as all of the others because it's a planet. Please actually demonstrate one or both of these statements to be true independently of the other.
In Flat Earth Theory, gravity is non-existent. Instead there is a Universal Acceleration. Learn more at http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=UA (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=UA)
I assume that earth is round because other planets are round (Apart from other evidence you quote as fake), so, we have to prove that earth is a different case to say it's flat. I read the UA article, but then, how we orbit around the sun? Or in earth-center-of-universe case. how other bodies orbit around us?
I'll address you first, since you're actually polite and likeable. The other bodies do not orbit the Earth. Instead, they follow an orbit directly above the Earth. Here's a diagram showing the path of the Sun, for example [Removed image to save space]
Your argument is that the Earth must be a planet because it's the same as all of the other planets, and it must be the same as all of the others because it's a planet.
This is called a Strawman. You cannot argue the opposition's argument, so you dilute it to a point where you can argue it. In this case, it is even worse than a Strawman because you do not dilute it, you totally change it.
Show us where anyone opposing you has ever said what you are claiming. Or be intellectually honest and make an argument against the real claims of the other side.
Rereading, it appears that it's actually different people making those points. lmb32 said the one, you said the other. So I retract that particular point. However, it wasn't a straw man.
I see, while I still disagree with you, it's a shame you can't get money for serious research, so you can get the evidence to prove or discard the flat earth, who knows, the scientific community ignored Max Planck at first. As for the UA model, there's a force that accelerate things so that give us the feel of gravity, but gravity pulls things, so it's not constant at accelerating them at 9,8m/s^2, so, the UA model has to explain what force makes the sun 'orbit' (sorry if in the UA model moving around and object isn't called orbiting) around the earth, or in different model, what makes the earth orbit around the sun, REs (including me) say that gravity does that, but if you FE accept that, then there's a problem with flat earth, since gravity 'pulls' in all direction, that's why the planets we know are round. Also, you should post this models in some physics forums, like physicsforums, since you can't get the resources to serious research, you could try asking the guys over there so they can help you prove, disprove or fix the inconsistencies in the models.
-
lmb32, you are mistaking the people who argue the FET side for people who have an active interest in proving their cracked argument. They know they can't, so they just stand here on this forum shouting it to everyone. They are not troubled by such things as the need for proof. They are quite happy to discard evidence as false if it disagrees with their model, which shows that they will never bother doing an experiment.
-
lmb32, you are mistaking the people who argue the FET side for people who have an active interest in proving their cracked argument. They know they can't, so they just stand here on this forum shouting it to everyone. They are not troubled by such things as the need for proof. They are quite happy to discard evidence as false if it disagrees with their model, which shows that they will never bother doing an experiment.
Please don't bother posting if you're not going to contribute.
-
lmb32, you are mistaking the people who argue the FET side for people who have an active interest in proving their cracked argument. They know they can't, so they just stand here on this forum shouting it to everyone. They are not troubled by such things as the need for proof. They are quite happy to discard evidence as false if it disagrees with their model, which shows that they will never bother doing an experiment.
Please don't bother posting if you're not going to contribute.
lmb32 was advising the FE'ers on things he thought they should be doing. I was advising him on why that would be a waste of time. That's contributing. Prove me wrong at any time by doing an experiment or seeking advice on a physics forum. Post a link to the forum post when you've done so.
-
lmb32, you are mistaking the people who argue the FET side for people who have an active interest in proving their cracked argument. They know they can't, so they just stand here on this forum shouting it to everyone. They are not troubled by such things as the need for proof. They are quite happy to discard evidence as false if it disagrees with their model, which shows that they will never bother doing an experiment.
Please don't bother posting if you're not going to contribute.
lmb32 was advising the FE'ers on things he thought they should be doing. I was advising him on why that would be a waste of time. That's contributing. Prove me wrong at any time by doing an experiment or seeking advice on a physics forum. Post a link to the forum post when you've done so.
Neil, you should know that the endless variations on "LOL FEers are just trolls" such as the one you posted above are considered low-content and are frowned-upon in the upper forums.
You can consider this a warning.
If you need to get it off your chest take it up in Angry Ranting. Nobody is interested.
-
Wait when was the RE thory proven.
Why do u think earth is flat, all the other planets are round. and yes earth is special it is the right tempreture to allow liquid water to flow on its surface and has life but thats no reason to think the earth is flat.
the fe theory is just a theory that is self-centred when people believed the universe revolved around them and that they where the centre of everything. Well thats wrong the earth acts likes a sphere, looks like a sphere and is one.
how much proof do you want. To think so primitivly is strange. Move on now its over there is enough proof now and if you want you could start a fund raiser for the leader of this society and get him a ticket to go on a space plane so his theory is disproven and everyone knows the truth. if he sees a flat earth up there then your theory is right if not its wrong. And dont say there is no such as space travel there is ok so get over it you will see the earths curveture and know that your theory is wrong or that its flat and that your thoery is right. ok is that enough.
This will see who is right and who is wrong.
-
i can see with my own eyes that tv satilites dishes point to a point 22,000 miles above the equator. going against what is said in fe which uses things that cant be seen to disprove my direct observation? kind of ironic that you dismiss my direct observation and try to explain it away with something that is invisible.
My satellite dish is positioned straight out from my house. There appears to be no elevation whatsoever.
It just depends on where the transmitters are in your area. Satellites are for sci fi films.
-
Wait when was the RE thory proven.
Why do u think earth is flat, all the other planets are round. and yes earth is special it is the right tempreture to allow liquid water to flow on its surface and has life but thats no reason to think the earth is flat.
the fe theory is just a theory that is self-centred when people believed the universe revolved around them and that they where the centre of everything. Well thats wrong the earth acts likes a sphere, looks like a sphere and is one.
how much proof do you want. To think so primitivly is strange. Move on now its over there is enough proof now and if you want you could start a fund raiser for the leader of this society and get him a ticket to go on a space plane so his theory is disproven and everyone knows the truth. if he sees a flat earth up there then your theory is right if not its wrong. And dont say there is no such as space travel there is ok so get over it you will see the earths curveture and know that your theory is wrong or that its flat and that your thoery is right. ok is that enough.
This will see who is right and who is wrong.
Earth is special. It's the only know place what can sustain life as it stands.
It's like a leading actor/actress on stage, the spot light is trained on them and everything around them is trained on them.
We are not an insignificant planet as people think. We are the ultimate life sustaining place in the universe, or whatever it is and we can arrogantly say this until proven otherwise, which will take the presence of little/big/green/blue/red/pink or whatever coloured organisms to enter into our world to beg to differ.
-
Wait when was the RE thory proven.
Why do u think earth is flat, all the other planets are round. and yes earth is special it is the right tempreture to allow liquid water to flow on its surface and has life but thats no reason to think the earth is flat.
the fe theory is just a theory that is self-centred when people believed the universe revolved around them and that they where the centre of everything. Well thats wrong the earth acts likes a sphere, looks like a sphere and is one.
how much proof do you want. To think so primitivly is strange. Move on now its over there is enough proof now and if you want you could start a fund raiser for the leader of this society and get him a ticket to go on a space plane so his theory is disproven and everyone knows the truth. if he sees a flat earth up there then your theory is right if not its wrong. And dont say there is no such as space travel there is ok so get over it you will see the earths curveture and know that your theory is wrong or that its flat and that your thoery is right. ok is that enough.
This will see who is right and who is wrong.
Earth is special. It's the only know place what can sustain life as it stands.
It's like a leading actor/actress on stage, the spot light is trained on them and everything around them is trained on them.
We are not an insignificant planet as people think. We are the ultimate life sustaining place in the universe, or whatever it is and we can arrogantly say this until proven otherwise, which will take the presence of little/big/green/blue/red/pink or whatever coloured organisms to enter into our world to beg to differ.
You're special.
-
Wait when was the RE thory proven.
Why do u think earth is flat, all the other planets are round. and yes earth is special it is the right tempreture to allow liquid water to flow on its surface and has life but thats no reason to think the earth is flat.
the fe theory is just a theory that is self-centred when people believed the universe revolved around them and that they where the centre of everything. Well thats wrong the earth acts likes a sphere, looks like a sphere and is one.
how much proof do you want. To think so primitivly is strange. Move on now its over there is enough proof now and if you want you could start a fund raiser for the leader of this society and get him a ticket to go on a space plane so his theory is disproven and everyone knows the truth. if he sees a flat earth up there then your theory is right if not its wrong. And dont say there is no such as space travel there is ok so get over it you will see the earths curveture and know that your theory is wrong or that its flat and that your thoery is right. ok is that enough.
This will see who is right and who is wrong.
Earth is special. It's the only know place what can sustain life as it stands.
It's like a leading actor/actress on stage, the spot light is trained on them and everything around them is trained on them.
We are not an insignificant planet as people think. We are the ultimate life sustaining place in the universe, or whatever it is and we can arrogantly say this until proven otherwise, which will take the presence of little/big/green/blue/red/pink or whatever coloured organisms to enter into our world to beg to differ.
How would it be proven otherwise to you? Afterall you deny space travel so if evidence of life is found on another planet you wouldn't believe it anyway?
-
Wait when was the RE thory proven.
Why do u think earth is flat, all the other planets are round. and yes earth is special it is the right tempreture to allow liquid water to flow on its surface and has life but thats no reason to think the earth is flat.
the fe theory is just a theory that is self-centred when people believed the universe revolved around them and that they where the centre of everything. Well thats wrong the earth acts likes a sphere, looks like a sphere and is one.
how much proof do you want. To think so primitivly is strange. Move on now its over there is enough proof now and if you want you could start a fund raiser for the leader of this society and get him a ticket to go on a space plane so his theory is disproven and everyone knows the truth. if he sees a flat earth up there then your theory is right if not its wrong. And dont say there is no such as space travel there is ok so get over it you will see the earths curveture and know that your theory is wrong or that its flat and that your thoery is right. ok is that enough.
This will see who is right and who is wrong.
Earth is special. It's the only know place what can sustain life as it stands.
It's like a leading actor/actress on stage, the spot light is trained on them and everything around them is trained on them.
We are not an insignificant planet as people think. We are the ultimate life sustaining place in the universe, or whatever it is and we can arrogantly say this until proven otherwise, which will take the presence of little/big/green/blue/red/pink or whatever coloured organisms to enter into our world to beg to differ.
You're special.
We are all special in our own ways.You are special and satellites in space do not exist, which is not special.
-
Wait when was the RE thory proven.
Why do u think earth is flat, all the other planets are round. and yes earth is special it is the right tempreture to allow liquid water to flow on its surface and has life but thats no reason to think the earth is flat.
the fe theory is just a theory that is self-centred when people believed the universe revolved around them and that they where the centre of everything. Well thats wrong the earth acts likes a sphere, looks like a sphere and is one.
how much proof do you want. To think so primitivly is strange. Move on now its over there is enough proof now and if you want you could start a fund raiser for the leader of this society and get him a ticket to go on a space plane so his theory is disproven and everyone knows the truth. if he sees a flat earth up there then your theory is right if not its wrong. And dont say there is no such as space travel there is ok so get over it you will see the earths curveture and know that your theory is wrong or that its flat and that your thoery is right. ok is that enough.
This will see who is right and who is wrong.
Earth is special. It's the only know place what can sustain life as it stands.
It's like a leading actor/actress on stage, the spot light is trained on them and everything around them is trained on them.
We are not an insignificant planet as people think. We are the ultimate life sustaining place in the universe, or whatever it is and we can arrogantly say this until proven otherwise, which will take the presence of little/big/green/blue/red/pink or whatever coloured organisms to enter into our world to beg to differ.
How would it be proven otherwise to you? Afterall you deny space travel so if evidence of life is found on another planet you wouldn't believe it anyway?
When I see something that looks real.
-
When you see the world only through the eyes of others, then you'll only ever see it as they have told it to you. I find this an extraordinary show of faith and a woeful neglect of curiosity.
One can not live only possessing the knowledge they obtained on their own, you must borrow information from others in order to succeed in life. A rule of thumb should be that if everyone (99.999% percent of the 7 billion people on earth) is telling you something is the case and you think otherwise, you are almost certainly wrong. Most people learn this at an early age. Most people...
-
When you see the world only through the eyes of others, then you'll only ever see it as they have told it to you. I find this an extraordinary show of faith and a woeful neglect of curiosity.
One can not live only possessing the knowledge they obtained on their own, you must borrow information from others in order to succeed in life. A rule of thumb should be that if everyone (99.999% percent of the 7 billion people on earth) is telling you something is the case and you think otherwise, you are almost certainly wrong. Most people learn this at an early age. Most people...
200 years ago 99.999% of people would have told you that there is a God. Your move Maverick.
-
When you see the world only through the eyes of others, then you'll only ever see it as they have told it to you. I find this an extraordinary show of faith and a woeful neglect of curiosity.
One can not live only possessing the knowledge they obtained on their own, you must borrow information from others in order to succeed in life. A rule of thumb should be that if everyone (99.999% percent of the 7 billion people on earth) is telling you something is the case and you think otherwise, you are almost certainly wrong. Most people learn this at an early age. Most people...
200 years ago 99.999% of people would have told you that there is a God. Your move Maverick.
And two hundred before that 99.999% would have said the Earth was flat. Both opinions have changed Goose.
-
When you see the world only through the eyes of others, then you'll only ever see it as they have told it to you. I find this an extraordinary show of faith and a woeful neglect of curiosity.
One can not live only possessing the knowledge they obtained on their own, you must borrow information from others in order to succeed in life. A rule of thumb should be that if everyone (99.999% percent of the 7 billion people on earth) is telling you something is the case and you think otherwise, you are almost certainly wrong. Most people learn this at an early age. Most people...
200 years ago 99.999% of people would have told you that there is a God. Your move Maverick.
And two hundred before that 99.999% would have said the Earth was flat. Both opinions have changed Goose.
Yeah, well flared trousers made a come back. I'm rooting for Flat Earth Theory. History has a habit of repeating itself.
-
When you see the world only through the eyes of others, then you'll only ever see it as they have told it to you. I find this an extraordinary show of faith and a woeful neglect of curiosity.
One can not live only possessing the knowledge they obtained on their own, you must borrow information from others in order to succeed in life. A rule of thumb should be that if everyone (99.999% percent of the 7 billion people on earth) is telling you something is the case and you think otherwise, you are almost certainly wrong. Most people learn this at an early age. Most people...
200 years ago 99.999% of people would have told you that there is a God. Your move Maverick.
And two hundred before that 99.999% would have said the Earth was flat. Both opinions have changed Goose.
Actually, that's not true:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth)
We get a lot of noobs who proudly present this link to us as if it somehow contradicts what we say. I'm pleased to be able to use it in a valid context for once.
-
When you see the world only through the eyes of others, then you'll only ever see it as they have told it to you. I find this an extraordinary show of faith and a woeful neglect of curiosity.
One can not live only possessing the knowledge they obtained on their own, you must borrow information from others in order to succeed in life. A rule of thumb should be that if everyone (99.999% percent of the 7 billion people on earth) is telling you something is the case and you think otherwise, you are almost certainly wrong. Most people learn this at an early age. Most people...
200 years ago 99.999% of people would have told you that there is a God. Your move Maverick.
And two hundred before that 99.999% would have said the Earth was flat. Both opinions have changed Goose.
Actually, that's not true:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth)
We get a lot of noobs who proudly present this link to us as if it somehow contradicts what we say. I'm pleased to be able to use it in a valid context for once.
Very good. I withdraw my remark Iceman *shakes fist*.