What Makes the Flat Earth Hypothesis Believable in the First Place?

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 12:57:56 AM

Are you saying all these and the hundreds of thousands thousands of other images are all fake?

Where have I ever indicated anything of the like?
Yet again, you are attempting deflect from your complete inability to defend your delusional BS.

I have not said Earth is flat.
I have not said that there is no evidence that shows Earth is round.
I have not said there can be no RE models.
These are just your pathetic strawmen to pretend you are correct.

Grow up, stop deflecting, and either defend your BS or admit it is wrong.
You can start by providing a coherent, consistent set of requirements for a model, which we can then apply to the models produced by the scientists you idolise and worship.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:19:04 AM

The whole ‘accuracy thing’ when it comes to scientific models is a complete shoal of red herrings.

No, it is a fundamental issue.
You want to pretend there can't be FE models, because they are not accurate.
But the simple fact is virtually all scientific models have some known inaccuracy.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:19:04 AM

Scientific Models are often made to find things out and not provide definitive answers and are very often not very accurate.

So what is wrong with making a FE model to find things out?
Why do you keep appealing to definitive answers?

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:19:04 AM

The data used needs to be scientific in nature collected and gathered using some form of protocols that can be checked by others. The aim of the scientific model needs as the name implies ‘be scientific’ in nature.

Which in no way precludes gathering data and using it to construct a FE model.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:19:04 AM

Flat earth belief has NO scientific data.

1 - Prove it.
2 - Not enough to show that there can't be FE data.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:19:04 AM

How can they be?

As stated, there are plenty of cases where you cannot tell the difference between a FE and a RE, where you could obtain scientific data which is consistent with a FE.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:19:04 AM

With flat earth belief having no science and no scientific data the creation of a flat earth scientific model is an impossibility and puts paid to Jack Blockhead’s unsubstantiated claim of:

No, it shows the desperation of morons who feel the need to claim that there can be no FE models, while not being able to back up their claims at all.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:19:04 AM

Flat earth has “PLENTY REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"
Those being his very own words.

Which I have justified, and which you have been entirely incapable of refuting.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:19:04 AM

Which he like a true flat earther just keeps repeating over and over again without ever offering any evidence! This being a classic flat earth ploy just keep repeating lots of notions over and over again without ever providing evidence.

The one acting like a true FEer here is you.
You spout delusional nonsense, you refuse to back it up, you deflect and demand others prove your claims wrong rather than you proving them right.
You blatantly lie about what people have said to set up strawmen to attack because you can't actually refute what they have said.
And you deflect and try changing the subject to flee from your initial claims.

And the BS you have been spouting supports the FEers.
Claims like scientific measurements have no uncertainty, and that you should always be able to measure the curve or be able to tell the difference between a RE and a FE just supports the FE who make measurements yet cannot detect the curve.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:19:04 AM

My Challenge to Jack Blockhead is to show

You mean is to yet again deflect from your inability to defend your delusional BS.
My challenge for you moron is to provide a coherent, consistent definition of a model, which can be applied to the models of the scientists you worship, and then for you to demonstrate how the FE fails to be able to meet this criteria without just trying to shift the burden of proof.

The burden of proof! If you consider those images are true what more proof do you need?

You said:-

“Where have I ever indicated anything of the like?
Yet again, you are attempting deflect from your complete inability to defend your delusional BS.”

Are you crazy ? You clearly indicated it by what you previously claimed.
You said:-

“Flat earth has “PLENTY REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

By saying the above you obviously think that they are correct in their assertions! As on this question you are either right or wrong there is no halfway house. If those images are a true representation then there can be nothing real about  anything to do with FE belief. You said:-

“Where have I ever indicated anything of the like?
Yet again, you are attempting deflect from your complete inability to defend your delusional BS.”

Are you crazy ? You clearly indicated it by what you previously claimed.
You said:-

“Flat earth has “PLENTY REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

By saying the above you obviously think that they are correct in their assertions! As on this question you are either right or wrong there is no halfway house.

The problem with you Mr Blockhead is you want to have it both ways even when there is only one way and that answer is not open for debate!

As I said there is no grey area in the shape of the earth. If you believe those photos are a true representation of the earth shape, a sphere, then there can be no possibility of it being any other shape. That implies the flat earth belief is not based on reality and if therefore a fiction.

Once more you contradict yourself by your silly sitting on your contradictory fence where you want it both ways.

Then you twist what I actually  said by lying and saying this:-

“You want to pretend there can't be FE models, because they are not accurate.
But the simple fact is virtually all scientific models have some known inaccuracy.”

As I have said the fact that there are no flat earth scientific models has nothing to do with them not being accurate! It’s more to do with them being totally impossible, something I have clearly stated from the outset. Flat earth belief is a fiction with no science hence the impossibility of it generating any scientific models. Nothing to do with inaccuracy!

Flat Earth belief is a fictional fantasy.
If you believe those photos are not fake how can It be anything other than a fantasy?

The problem with you Mr Blockhead is you want to have it both ways even when there is only one way and that answer is not open for debate!

As I said there is no grey area in the shape of the earth. If you believe those photos are a true representation of the earth shape, a sphere, then there can be no possibility of it being any other shape. That implies the flat earth belief is not based on reality and if therefore a fiction.

Once more you contradict yourself by your silly sitting on your contradictory fence where you want it both ways.

Then you twist what I actually  said by lying and saying this:-

“You want to pretend there can't be FE models, because they are not accurate.
But the simple fact is virtually all scientific models have some known inaccuracy.”

As I have said the fact that there are no flat earth scientific models has nothing to do with them not being accurate! It’s more to do with them being totally impossible, something I have clearly stated from the outset. Flat earth belief is a fiction with no science hence the impossibility of it generating any scientific models. Nothing to do with inaccuracy!

Flat Earth belief is a fictional fantasy.
If you believe those photos are not fake how can It be anything other than a fantasy?

The burden of proof! If you consider those images are true what more proof do you need?

How about proof of what you actually claim?

If I provide a bunch of pictures of kittens can I then claim I have met my burden and you accept that there can be FE models?
As that is effectively what you are doing.

Showing pictures of Earth from space in no way supports your claim that there can't be FE models or they can't obtain data.

Once more, you made a clearly BS claim. And because you can't justify that claim that you actually made, you instead want to try justifying a different claim.
That is deflecting. That is trying to move the goalposts. That is pathetic.

By saying the above you obviously think that they are correct in their assertions!

Your dishonesty truly knows no bounds.
There is nothing obvious about that conclusion, especially as what I actually said was:

There is plenty that they can base a model or hypothesis on, and plenty more to demonstrate those models and hypotheses are wrong.

That makes it quite clear that I don't think they are correct.

As on this question you are either right or wrong there is no halfway house.

So you wish to cling to a false dichotomy.
Everyone is either firmly with your cult, agreeing with all the delusional BS you say, or they are against it, disagreeing with everything it says.

Reality is not that simple.
In reality, I can accept the fact that there can be FE models, without thinking Earth is flat.

If those images are a true representation then there can be nothing real about anything to do with FE belief.

Well as I know that Earth's existence is something to do with FE belief, as FEers believe Earth exists, and I know that Earth does exist, then by your complete absence of reason, I guess that means those images cannot be a true representation.

And I can also bring up the idols you worship yet again.
If the quantum mechanical model of the atom is a true representation then there can be nothing real about anything to do with Bohr's model of the atom.

The problem with you Mr Blockhead is you want to have it both ways

The problem with you Mr Moron is you want your cult to be accepted and cannot accept anything challenging it, as you see any even minor challenge as equivalent to claiming everything about your cult is wrong.
You are the one who wants it both ways. You are the one who is contradicting themselves.

The only way for you to not contradict yourself with all the delusional BS you are spouting is if you claim all the outdated models of the atoms are not models.
It would still be incredibly dishonest as you are appealing to a false dichotomy, but it would at least be consistently dishoenst.
But instead you want it both ways.
You would this false dichotomy to apply to the things you hate so you can irrationally and religiously attack them; while demanding it is never applied to those you worship.

If you believe those photos are a true representation of the earth shape, a sphere, then there can be no possibility of it being any other shape. That implies the flat earth belief is not based on reality and if therefore a fiction.

Again, consider the application of that statement to your idols:
If you believe the quantum mechanical model of the atom is a true representation of the atom, an inherently quantum mechanical system described by wavefunctions, then there can be no possibility of it being any other system. That implies that the Bohr belief is not based upon on reality and is therefore a fiction.

Then you twist what I actually  said by lying and saying this:

You mean by paraphrasing what you have said?

The problem here mr Smokie, in trying to explain clearly and  above all accurately cosmological features like the nature of planets, their shape, orbits and other physical characteristics the method employed if it is to provide an accurate answer must be done using a method(s) that have certain protocols and uses certain methodologies. We have decided to call that approach scientific.

If you decide to approach taking these measurements in a scientific and methodical way using appropriate equipment and accurate results are obtained it will therefore be an impossibility for these results to be interpreted in any  way that will lead anyone to suggest the earth is not a globe.

Their data need not be perfect just the accuracy required to make a reasonable scientific model, which of course would disprove their belief.

Your entire argument rests upon the FE model being wrong, and claiming that because it is wrong, you can't have any models.
Wrong is just a different way of saying inaccurate.

As I have said the fact that there are no flat earth scientific models has nothing to do with them not being accurate! It’s more to do with them being totally impossible

And what makes them impossible? That they are wrong (inaccurate)?

Flat Earth belief is a fictional fantasy.
If you believe those photos are not fake how can It be anything other than a fantasy?

Again, apply this to your idols.
If you believe the data supporting the quantum mechanical model of the atom are not fake, how can the Plum Pudding belief, the Rutherford belief and the Bohr belief be anything other than a fictional fantasy, incapable of producing models?

All your irrational, religious attacks can be applied equally well to the models of those you worship, but you refuse to because you worship them.

So like I said, how about you try providing a coherent, consistent set of requirements for something to be a model, and then we can discuss if the products of your idols count as models (and only if they do or you agree they don't do we move on to FE models).

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 10:11:05 AM

The burden of proof! If you consider those images are true what more proof do you need?

How about proof of what you actually claim?

If I provide a bunch of pictures of kittens can I then claim I have met my burden and you accept that there can be FE models?
As that is effectively what you are doing.

Showing pictures of Earth from space in no way supports your claim that there can't be FE models or they can't obtain data.

Once more, you made a clearly BS claim. And because you can't justify that claim that you actually made, you instead want to try justifying a different claim.
That is deflecting. That is trying to move the goalposts. That is pathetic.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 10:11:05 AM

By saying the above you obviously think that they are correct in their assertions!

Your dishonesty truly knows no bounds.
There is nothing obvious about that conclusion, especially as what I actually said was:

Quote from: JackBlack on November 06, 2022, 01:41:21 AM

There is plenty that they can base a model or hypothesis on, and plenty more to demonstrate those models and hypotheses are wrong.

That makes it quite clear that I don't think they are correct.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 10:11:05 AM

As on this question you are either right or wrong there is no halfway house.

So you wish to cling to a false dichotomy.
Everyone is either firmly with your cult, agreeing with all the delusional BS you say, or they are against it, disagreeing with everything it says.

Reality is not that simple.
In reality, I can accept the fact that there can be FE models, without thinking Earth is flat.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 10:11:05 AM

If those images are a true representation then there can be nothing real about anything to do with FE belief.

Well as I know that Earth's existence is something to do with FE belief, as FEers believe Earth exists, and I know that Earth does exist, then by your complete absence of reason, I guess that means those images cannot be a true representation.

And I can also bring up the idols you worship yet again.
If the quantum mechanical model of the atom is a true representation then there can be nothing real about anything to do with Bohr's model of the atom.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 10:11:05 AM

The problem with you Mr Blockhead is you want to have it both ways

The problem with you Mr Moron is you want your cult to be accepted and cannot accept anything challenging it, as you see any even minor challenge as equivalent to claiming everything about your cult is wrong.
You are the one who wants it both ways. You are the one who is contradicting themselves.

The only way for you to not contradict yourself with all the delusional BS you are spouting is if you claim all the outdated models of the atoms are not models.
It would still be incredibly dishonest as you are appealing to a false dichotomy, but it would at least be consistently dishoenst.
But instead you want it both ways.
You would this false dichotomy to apply to the things you hate so you can irrationally and religiously attack them; while demanding it is never applied to those you worship.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 10:11:05 AM

If you believe those photos are a true representation of the earth shape, a sphere, then there can be no possibility of it being any other shape. That implies the flat earth belief is not based on reality and if therefore a fiction.

Again, consider the application of that statement to your idols:
If you believe the quantum mechanical model of the atom is a true representation of the atom, an inherently quantum mechanical system described by wavefunctions, then there can be no possibility of it being any other system. That implies that the Bohr belief is not based upon on reality and is therefore a fiction.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 10:11:05 AM

Then you twist what I actually  said by lying and saying this:

You mean by paraphrasing what you have said?

Quote from: Timeisup on November 13, 2022, 12:49:21 AM

The problem here mr Smokie, in trying to explain clearly and  above all accurately cosmological features like the nature of planets, their shape, orbits and other physical characteristics the method employed if it is to provide an accurate answer must be done using a method(s) that have certain protocols and uses certain methodologies. We have decided to call that approach scientific.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 13, 2022, 11:19:06 PM

If you decide to approach taking these measurements in a scientific and methodical way using appropriate equipment and accurate results are obtained it will therefore be an impossibility for these results to be interpreted in any  way that will lead anyone to suggest the earth is not a globe.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 14, 2022, 03:24:13 AM

Their data need not be perfect just the accuracy required to make a reasonable scientific model, which of course would disprove their belief.

Your entire argument rests upon the FE model being wrong, and claiming that because it is wrong, you can't have any models.
Wrong is just a different way of saying inaccurate.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 10:11:05 AM

As I have said the fact that there are no flat earth scientific models has nothing to do with them not being accurate! It’s more to do with them being totally impossible

And what makes them impossible? That they are wrong (inaccurate)?

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 10:11:05 AM

Flat Earth belief is a fictional fantasy.
If you believe those photos are not fake how can It be anything other than a fantasy?

Again, apply this to your idols.
If you believe the data supporting the quantum mechanical model of the atom are not fake, how can the Plum Pudding belief, the Rutherford belief and the Bohr belief be anything other than a fictional fantasy, incapable of producing models?

All your irrational, religious attacks can be applied equally well to the models of those you worship, but you refuse to because you worship them.

So like I said, how about you try providing a coherent, consistent set of requirements for something to be a model, and then we can discuss if the products of your idols count as models (and only if they do or you agree they don't do we move on to FE models).

Are you saying all those thousands of images taken from space and low earth orbit showing the world as a sphere are not proof!
Never mind both the live streaming video and still images. What more proof do you need?

Denying they constitute proof is one of the many conspiracy driven ploys used by both  flat earth brigade and now you.

The fact that you disregard it as evidence in no way diminishes it as proof of a true representation of the planet with no religion or dogma involved.

The only dogma driven comments are your very own.

Are you saying all those thousands of images taken from space and low earth orbit showing the world as a sphere are not proof!

Are you saying that these thousands of images of kittens are not proof?
https://www.google.com/search?q=kitten&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBAU700AU701&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjom_nF5sz7AhWixjgGHetwBDUQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1920&bih=937&dpr=1

What more proof do you need?

Once more, they do not prove that there cannot be FE models.
i.e. they do not prove your BS claim that I objected to.

What more proof do you need?

Again, proof for your actual claim, the one I objected to.
Not some pathetic other claim you are trying to deflect to to pretend you aren't wrong.

The only dogma driven comments are your very own.

The dogmatic comments are yours.
You think that everything must either fully support your cult BS, or fully oppose it, opposing everything it says.
Reality is not that simple.
Your dogmatic BS, that there can never be any FE models, simply because Earth is round; while directly contradicting that by accepting classical atomic models, even though the atom cannot be fully described by classical models and instead requires the use of quantum mechanics.

You show all the bad traits of FEers and religious people.

Now again, going to try providing evidence for your claim that there can be no FE models?
Perhaps by starting with a coherent, consistent set of requirements for a model that can be applied to your idols?

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:23:30 PM

Are you saying all those thousands of images taken from space and low earth orbit showing the world as a sphere are not proof!

Are you saying that these thousands of images of kittens are not proof?
https://www.google.com/search?q=kitten&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBAU700AU701&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjom_nF5sz7AhWixjgGHetwBDUQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1920&bih=937&dpr=1

What more proof do you need?

Once more, they do not prove that there cannot be FE models.
i.e. they do not prove your BS claim that I objected to.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:23:30 PM

What more proof do you need?

Again, proof for your actual claim, the one I objected to.
Not some pathetic other claim you are trying to deflect to to pretend you aren't wrong.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 01:23:30 PM

The only dogma driven comments are your very own.

The dogmatic comments are yours.
You think that everything must either fully support your cult BS, or fully oppose it, opposing everything it says.
Reality is not that simple.
Your dogmatic BS, that there can never be any FE models, simply because Earth is round; while directly contradicting that by accepting classical atomic models, even though the atom cannot be fully described by classical models and instead requires the use of quantum mechanics.

You show all the bad traits of FEers and religious people.

Now again, going to try providing evidence for your claim that there can be no FE models?
Perhaps by starting with a coherent, consistent set of requirements for a model that can be applied to your idols?

No idols or kittens required. Though you objecting to reality sums you up.

These are not images of kittens these are images and live data streams produced by various data capture systems currently in orbit that feed this data into various global networks and other smart systems.

There is no rational argument that exists that can deny the existence of these various systems and their resulting outputs, considering the variety of end users and the multitude of uses this data is put to.

You not being able to accept their validity proves nothing. All it proves is that YOU don’t accept them and NOT that they are unacceptable, especially when the world as a whole accepts them. That is the reality.

Your desire to make FE claims into some form of reality is all in your imagination. Your constant need to refer to the acceptance of validated main stream knowledge and science as akin to idol worship demonstrates just how corrupt and distorted your thinking is. This is compounded by you making the absurd claim that the FE belief has…

“ REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

The irony is that you have presented zero proof or examples of either. You just made the claim. No photos of kittens for you! All you present is imaginary photos of invisible kittens claiming they exist and you have the invisible cat shit to prove it!

Your desire to make FE claims into some form of reality is all in your imagination.

Have you not looked at JB's post history?

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 02:50:08 PM

Your desire to make FE claims into some form of reality is all in your imagination.

Have you not looked at JB's post history?

Timmie thinks anyone who doesn't agree with his ridiculous statements must support FE.

This is compounded by you
making the absurd claim that the FE belief has…

“ REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

The irony is that you have presented zero proof or examples of either.

I think your own dogma is showing…

George Box remains a useful rule of thumb: ‘all models are wrong, but some are useful’.

https://aeon.co/essays/all-scientific-models-are-wrong-but-some-at-least-are-useful

Shrugs……

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 03:13:50 PM

Mikey T, grab yourself some more popcorn. The fun's only just beginning......

Oh, you are planning on making an even bigger fool of yourself?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

JockBlock, I’m impressed! You only called me a moron three times in your last post! Being in the upper  threads, that’s clearly behaviour that only a Flat Earther such as yourself could get away with!

Moron, I’m impressed! You only called me Jock, JockBlock, Blockhead, etc four times in your last post! Being in the upper  threads, that’s clearly behaviour that only a Flat Earther such as yourself could get away with!

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

Those atom models physically represent the physical components of atoms.

And do so inaccurately.
Likewise, a physical FE model can physically represent the physical components of Earth, just not accurately.

If you are happy with those being models of the atom, you really have no ground to stand upon to claim there can't be FE models.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

Jock, you said the atom cannot be represented as a 3d model and printed out physically, so I show you it can, so you resort to calling me, “dishonest”?

Moron, I call you dishonest because you are lying about what I said.
I pointed out that dishoensty in the previous post, but you continue and double down by entirely ignoring it.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

pretend your usage of the word, “the” somehow magically meant, “my”.

And a further example of your dishonesty.
It wasn't "The" that mean "my"
It was you saying "your" that meant "my"

You said "your models", so I responded by referring to "my model"

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

Even so, waves can be represented physically in a model, Jock.

A wave, or a wavefunction extending through 3D space, with multiple such overlapping wavefunctions, moron?
 

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

Taken to the logical conclusion, Flat Earthers have to be 100% science deniers.

How about instead of just asserting that as the logical conclusion you instead try to demonstrate it.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

Science answers the who, what, when, where, and how the Earth is spherical. Flat Earthers cannot answer any of these.

Why would FEers answer such questions when they don't think Earth is spherical?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

The instruments that flat earthers purchase in order to prove the earth is flat, they have no idea how to properly operate them in a scientific manner.

And another baseless claim.
And I notice how you just ignored that your claim was disproven, as if it doesn't matter at all.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

As for mental models of a flat earth, even you reading the words, “flat earth”, you are conjuring forth in your mind a flat earth mental model. You, like most of us, being familiar with with mapped shapes of countries  and continents, would include even vague shapes of these in that mental model.

I don’t know how or why you disagree with this, but a flat earth model, even the one you just created in that big head of yours, is a flat earth model of the entire Earth, not a portion of Earth, or a thousand kilometre stretch, but the entire Earth.

I woudl say that entirely depends upon what I am thinking about.
Just because you are incapable of imaging a FE model which isn't the entire Earth doesn't mean no one can.

But your statement betrays your claim.
If there can't be FE models, how could I be creating one in my head?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

Despite the ridiculous tangent you then embarked on, probably to try and cover your ineptitude, I did not say, nor did I allude to, that a round Earth model could not exist prior to the entire Earth being mapped.

You mean a quite rational tangent based upon what you have said, to show the insantiy of your claims.
Your argument quite clearly indicates that a RE model cannot exist prior to the entire Earth being mapped.

This was your claim:

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 23, 2022, 01:10:26 PM

For Flat Earthers to ethically create a Flat Earth model of the entire Earth, they would first have to become Cartographers and map the entire Earth from scratch.

The simplest, honest, logical extension to that is:
For Round Earthers to ethically create a Round Earth model of the entire Earth, they would first have to become Cartographers and map the entire Earth from scratch.

Now, you could try to say that REers aren't science deniers, even though plenty of them are, and not all FEers would say they are, and likewise I can discard the entire point of ethically, as you are trying to show that there can't be FE models; but the key part remains:
In order to create a RE model of the entire Earth then would need a map of the entire Earth.

Otherwise, if REers can create a RE model, without needing to have mapped the entire Earth, why can't FEers make a FE model, without needing to map the entire Earth?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

They can model the little flat Earth picture

You mean they can create a FE model?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

For the Flat Earther, the big picture which includes shapes of countries and continents, and even the shape of the very Earth itself, has to be shapeless and formless, with question marks hanging over everything. The Flat Earther Flat Earth model would perhaps best be represented by whiteness, like being inside a cloud, as they cannot reliably or with any certainty say the bigger shape of anything.

And what stops that applying to REers prior to having the entire Earth mapped?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

As I said previously, the only avenue open to Flat Earthers is to go out and re-map the entire world, or at least enough to disprove the Earth is a globe.

Or, to start constructing a FE model, with the limited data they have, leaving it to be expanded upon later, with more data showing that Earth isn't flat.
Just like I said.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 24, 2022, 07:56:28 PM

So, I’ll try again to say this for you, JockBlock, in a literalist manner that hopefully, even one such as yourself can comprehend.   

Flat Earthers cannot create a flat Earth model because a flat earth model is by default, a flat earth model of the entire earth that flat earthers have no data they can reliably create this flat Earth model from.

And I'll say it agian for you, moron, ion a manner that hopefully even one such as yourself can comprehend:
FEers can create a FE model, as there is plenty of data which they can use or obtain which is or will be consistent with a FE.
Additional data showing Earth is not flat does not negate that possibility.
There is no requirement to have mapped the entire Earth before making a model.

Jock, maybe you'd feel more at home on the football field, throwing your football around, than engaging in intellectual discussions? 

A playful twist of your name, a nickname even, or a pet name, does not equate to calling someone, a derrogatory name like "moron". If this temper tantrum of yours continues, you may have a chance of stomping this globe earth flat! Tiemeup hasn't taken issue to my nickname for him!

So, define "inaccurately" in JockBlock world? I already said the atom models represented the components only. Take notice I said, "the" components, and didn't mean, "my". 

I'm yet to see one of your favourite fellow flat earthers come up with a flat earth model which even attempts to model what's going on underneath our feet! Ground has depth and reality is in three dimensions, including this pesky world.

I have plenty of ground to say there cannot be flat earth models - from a number of directions. Remember, flat earth models represent the entirety of the earth, not just the square metre under your feet. From the scientific direction - no chance. From the direction of relying upon flat earth data to create a flat earth model - double no chance.

On that last point, care to provide just one piece of data a flat earther can put to immediate good use to begin creating his very own flat earth model? Just one piece of data, Jock. You keep referring to it, so I know you must have some and you wouldn't be dishonest and just make that up. 

The difference between a sphere and an unknown or infinite, or boundary-less flat plane, is a sphere is a closed three dimensional object. That's why our ancestors could literally just fill in the gaps and continue to hone and define the surface of the globe earth model, and then later what's going on inside it.

A flat entire earth could be an infinite number of different shapes. Therefore, because the flat earth is not a closed three dimensional object, where the overall size has been calculated, but an ill defined two dimensional flat surface, it is necessary to map the entire flat earth to establish the size of this flat surface. Do you agree, Jock? Do you agree there is no way to mathematically calculate the size of flat Earth, which is a two dimensional flat plane?

It could be square, triangular, circular, rectangular, or an infinite number of shapes. It needs to be mapped. It's not my problem that any mapping results in earth being a globe, is it?

All flat earthers have to start their flat earth model is a flaaaaaaaaaat surface isn't it? That's it. They have literally nothing else to work with. A flaaaaaaaaaaaaat surface anywhere and there's your flat earth model, ey, Jock? There is no data to even start a flat earth model, Jock. Zero.

But, feel free to prove me wrong.

Now Jock, be a good little boy, and cough up just one piece of flat earth data that flat earthers can use to start creating a model of the entire flat earth. 

Quote from: Stash on November 26, 2022, 02:57:12 PM

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 02:50:08 PM

Your desire to make FE claims into some form of reality is all in your imagination.

Have you not looked at JB's post history?

Timmie thinks anyone who doesn't agree with his ridiculous statements must support FE.

JackBlack is supporting FE by patting them on the head and telling them ofcourse they can make flat earth models. Its not Tiemeups fault that Jack doesn't think before he types, and digs himself into ever deeper holes that he has to try and lie his way out of.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 02:50:08 PM

This is compounded by you
making the absurd claim that the FE belief has…

“ REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

The irony is that you have presented zero proof or examples of either.

I think your own dogma is showing…

Quote

George Box remains a useful rule of thumb: ‘all models are wrong, but some are useful’.

https://aeon.co/essays/all-scientific-models-are-wrong-but-some-at-least-are-useful

Shrugs……

Theories are overturned all the time as new discoveries are made it’s how science works. Making assumptions on the best data available and then drawing a conclusion along with presenting the collected data and other materials to support your position. That’s how it’s normally done.

The VERY FACT that those ideas were overturned demonstrates how well it works. Ironic is it not that FE belief still clings to 4!

That is very different from the FE brigade where their notions are all made up with zero data. Go to their website and look for an actual functional model with supporting data that can be tested…… and you will find none.

You might imagine that there might be alleged FE models and data and that’s exactly where they will stay in your imagination. Several people claim they exist but I have yet to see one. Mr Blockhead had been raving about their existence and to date had not produced a single one nor has he produced actual “plenty real flat earth data”. If pretty obvious why he had not done this as none actually exist!

There is no debate about the shape of the earth. All of science is in total agreement and has been for the last 2000 years. The whole academic and scientific world are in agreement. There is no alternative shape if can be and it’s both madness and delusional to suggest otherwise.

Might the sun be a cuboid? Mr. Blockhead suggests there could be a strong case for that! How about you create a good scientific model for that!

The proof of the world being a globe is overwhelming, it’s reality. Thousands of satellites are in orbit, people fly around it sail and drive around it all using data from satellites in orbit.

There is no debate, there is no dogma it’s what nature has proclaimed the earth should be like, not science, not dogma nor religion. It’s not a grey area and in no way can it be compared to the list you presented. To suggest otherwise is a total misrepresentation and distortion of the facts to suit your anti nature argument.

The earth is as it is despite what you, Mr. Blockhead or any other looney might think. No matter what heaps of illogic you throw out your collective prams the facts won’t change, flat earth won’t have any science nor will it be able to produce scientific models.

If you disagree how about being honest for a change and present a scientific model with the evidence to back it up. You appear to suggest it’s a possibility so how about giving some.

Big shrug!

People at this very moment might be looking out the window of the ISS gazing down on a spherical earth. It’s what it is no matter what YOU might want, need or think.

 What you individually might want, need or think does not change the reality of the situation that nature has decided upon.

It’s not, religion, science, dogma or any of the other irrelevant guff that Mr. Blockhead has come up with that has decided on what reality should be.

 Reality is as it is science just attempts to discover what this reality is often in a haphazard stop go way.

The shape of the earth required no haphazard search all it currently requires is a glance out of a window.

https://www.businessinsider.co.za/amp/best-astronaut-photos-from-the-international-space-station-this-year-2022-11

What YOU think is neither here nor there. Who are YOU to disagree with what nature decided and what reality had therefore become?

Though you objecting to reality sums you up.

And straight off to projection.

These are not images of kittens

Are you saying there are no images of kittens here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=kitten&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBAU700AU701&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjom_nF5sz7AhWixjgGHetwBDUQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1920&bih=937&dpr=1

Surely this is conclusive proof that you are wrong.

There is no rational argument that exists that can deny the existence of these various systems

Good thing I'm not.
Now how about you stop attacking the strawman you have constructed, and try justifying your delusional BS?

You not being able to accept their validity proves nothing. All it proves is that YOU don’t accept them

Quite the opposite.
Your BS claims like this, which amount to nothing more than blatant lies to try and pretend you are not wrong just shows your dishonesty and desperation.

You have no basis at all upon which to claim that I don't accept them.

What I have stated is that they do not support your claim, just like the link to kitten photos doesn't support the refutation of your argument.

Showing Earth is round in no way demonstrates that there cannot be FE models.

Your constant need to refer to the acceptance of validated main stream knowledge and science as akin to idol worship demonstrates just how corrupt and distorted your thinking is.

Yet again, this just portrays your dishonesty.
It isn't simply acceptance, it is the way you treat it, where you see anything that even has a potential to go against it as heresy that needs to be attacked and which must be wrong at all costs; leading you to spout delusional BS that there can be no FE models, and that the only way you can gain knowledge is by accepting what these experts claim.

That goes far beyond mere acceptance. It turns it into idol worship, and is a pathetic attempt to try and turn science into religion, outright rejecting the fundamental principles of science.

This is compounded by you making the absurd claim that the FE belief has…
“ REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

You mean my rational claims which I have justified and which you have been entirely unable to refute.
But because they go against your cult, you attack it irrationally, and religious; denying evidence that shows you are wrong and repeatedly spouting pathetic lies, all while trying to deflect.

Truly pathetic.

Now again, care to try defending your BS, specifically the BS I objected to, instead of trying to change the topic to something else?
Such as by providing a coherent, consistent set of requirements for a model, which can be applied to the models of those you worship?

Theories are overturned all the time as new discoveries are made it’s how science works.

Yes, and that means it is not a requirement for models to fully explain reality.
They can be wrong, and they can still be models.

The VERY FACT that those ideas were overturned demonstrates how well it works.

And how abhorrent your cult would be if it had its way.
With your cult, there could be no debate.
If your pathetic cult had its way, we would still be accepting the aether, as there would be no debate allowed, and no possibility of an alternative model.

Mr Blockhead had been raving about their existence and to date had not produced a single one nor has he produced actual “plenty real flat earth data”. If pretty obvious why he had not done this as none actually exist!

You mean Mr Moron has been lying about this to try and prop up their pathetic anti-science cult which worships scientists, all because he doesn't like reality.

The proof of the world being a globe is overwhelming, it’s reality.

Which in no way excludes the possibility of a FE model, just like the atom being quantum mechanical in nature did not exclude the possibility of a classical model of the atom.

Yet again, instead of even trying to defend the BS you spouted which I objected to, you instead want to try demonstrating Earth is a globe and pretend I am saying it isn't.
Truly pathetic.

No matter what heaps of illogic you throw out your collective prams the facts won’t change

No, no matter how much delusional religous BS you spout, no matter how heavily you cling to dishonest double standards, the facts wont change to suit your cult.
There will still be plenty of data that can be used to construct a FE model, and FE models will remain a possibility.

If you disagree, how about being honest for a change and providing a coherent, consistent set of requirements for something to meet in order to be deemed a model.
Then we can apply it to the products of those you worship.
Then, only if they pass, you can apply it to the FE to show how their can't be FE models.

People at this very moment might be looking out the window of the ISS gazing down on a spherical earth.

Which in no way excludes the possibility of FE models existing.

Just like right now, people may be experimenting on atoms making observations which require a quantum mechanical description of the atom, but that doesn't exclude the possibility of classical models existing.

Jock, maybe you'd feel more at home on the football field, throwing your football around, than engaging in intellectual discussions?

Moron, maybe you'd feel more at home in a pre-school, for special needs children, eating paint, than engaging in intellectual discussions?

A playful twist of your name, a nickname even, or a pet name, does not equate to calling someone, a derrogatory name like "moron".

So you think calling someone "blockhead" or "JockBlock" isn't derrogatory?
It would be one thing if you stopped at Jock, but you didn't.
So don't try and take the high ground.

So, define "inaccurately" in JockBlock world? I already said the atom models represented the components only.

Which fails to represent the entire atom.
So why should a FE model have to represent the entire FE?

I have plenty of ground to say there cannot be flat earth models - from a number of directions. Remember, flat earth models represent the entirety of the earth, not just the square metre under your feet.

No, they don't need to represent the entirety of Earth, just like RE models don't need to.
Again, why apply a double standard?
You are no better than the religious claiming a god must exist because everything needs a creator, but then saying their god doesn't.

If you want to go down this path, we could not have had RE models until quite recently, if at all.

On that last point, care to provide just one piece of data a flat earther can put to immediate good use to begin creating his very own flat earth model?

I already have.
It has been in my posts plenty of times.
As you are just attempting to shift the burden of proof, ignoring data that has been provided, and continually insulting, how about no.

The difference between a sphere and an unknown or infinite, or boundary-less flat plane, is a sphere is a closed three dimensional object. That's why our ancestors could literally just fill in the gaps and continue to hone and define the surface of the globe earth model, and then later what's going on inside it.

The gaps could be filled in with anything. Why should they have accepted it is a sphere?

It could be square, triangular, circular, rectangular, or an infinite number of shapes. It needs to be mapped.

Just like if you know that a portion of an object is a spherical cap, the entire object could be an infinite number of shapes.
It needs to be mapped.

There is no data to even start a flat earth model, Jock. Zero.

Ignoring the data doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

But, feel free to prove me wrong.

That isn't how the burden of proof works.
If you make a delusional claim, the burden is on you to justify it.
Again, you are acting the religious people that claim a god exists, and then demand others prove it doesn't.

JackBlack is supporting FE

Not in the slightest.
I am supporting reality and rational thought, but objecting to delusional BS; BS which is attempting to justify FE belief by pretending the belief in a RE is religious, where you just accept whatever experts say and reject anything which is consistent with a FE, where cultists of this religion spout delusional BS indicating you should always be able to distinguish between a RE and a FE; supporting Turbo with his claim that Earth can't be round because he can't measure it with a laser level, and skepties because he can't measure it in a sink, and that you just believe Earth is round because that is what you are told.

It's not my fault you and Timmy don't think before spouting such BS which supports the FE.

From how I said it, it is quite clear that I wasn't supporting a FE, as I made it clear that there is plenty of evidence to refute those models.
And if you knew anything about FEers, a lot of them try to avoid making actual models with actual testable properties, because as soon as they do that, you can show the model doesn't work.

Its not Tiemeups fault that Jack doesn't think before he types, and digs himself into ever deeper holes that he has to try and lie his way out of.

I do think before I type, and it most certainly is Timmy's fault that he keeps digging himself into even deeper holes that he has to try and lie his way out of.

[
The VERY FACT that those ideas were overturned demonstrates how well it works. Ironic is it not that FE belief still clings to 4!

Ok.  They hold on to a failed model.  It still had to be a model that had to be proven wrong before it was a failed model.  I hate to say it because I don’t want you or flat earther’s to take it wrong.  But when building a small home or a deck, you can treat the earth as flat as opposed to level surface.  So on a micro scale flat earth sort of works in that curvature can be ignored by people that never leave their yard.  As shown in post after post the curvature of the earth is so shallow it’s not apparent in most individual’s back yards.  And that means in this case its negligible like air resistance in most physics 101 experiments.

How’s the whole relativity vs quantum physicals and unified theory coming along?   And what does it mean to a person simply building a deck…

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 02:50:08 PM

Though you objecting to reality sums you up.

And straight off to projection.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 02:50:08 PM

These are not images of kittens

Are you saying there are no images of kittens here:
https://www.google.com/search?q=kitten&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBAU700AU701&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjom_nF5sz7AhWixjgGHetwBDUQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1920&bih=937&dpr=1

Surely this is conclusive proof that you are wrong.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 02:50:08 PM

There is no rational argument that exists that can deny the existence of these various systems

Good thing I'm not.
Now how about you stop attacking the strawman you have constructed, and try justifying your delusional BS?

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 02:50:08 PM

You not being able to accept their validity proves nothing. All it proves is that YOU don’t accept them

Quite the opposite.
Your BS claims like this, which amount to nothing more than blatant lies to try and pretend you are not wrong just shows your dishonesty and desperation.

You have no basis at all upon which to claim that I don't accept them.

What I have stated is that they do not support your claim, just like the link to kitten photos doesn't support the refutation of your argument.

Showing Earth is round in no way demonstrates that there cannot be FE models.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 02:50:08 PM

Your constant need to refer to the acceptance of validated main stream knowledge and science as akin to idol worship demonstrates just how corrupt and distorted your thinking is.

Yet again, this just portrays your dishonesty.
It isn't simply acceptance, it is the way you treat it, where you see anything that even has a potential to go against it as heresy that needs to be attacked and which must be wrong at all costs; leading you to spout delusional BS that there can be no FE models, and that the only way you can gain knowledge is by accepting what these experts claim.

That goes far beyond mere acceptance. It turns it into idol worship, and is a pathetic attempt to try and turn science into religion, outright rejecting the fundamental principles of science.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 26, 2022, 02:50:08 PM

This is compounded by you making the absurd claim that the FE belief has…
“ REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

You mean my rational claims which I have justified and which you have been entirely unable to refute.
But because they go against your cult, you attack it irrationally, and religious; denying evidence that shows you are wrong and repeatedly spouting pathetic lies, all while trying to deflect.

Truly pathetic.

Now again, care to try defending your BS, specifically the BS I objected to, instead of trying to change the topic to something else?
Such as by providing a coherent, consistent set of requirements for a model, which can be applied to the models of those you worship?

Quote from: Timeisup on November 27, 2022, 12:27:28 AM

Theories are overturned all the time as new discoveries are made it’s how science works.

Yes, and that means it is not a requirement for models to fully explain reality.
They can be wrong, and they can still be models.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 27, 2022, 12:27:28 AM

The VERY FACT that those ideas were overturned demonstrates how well it works.

And how abhorrent your cult would be if it had its way.
With your cult, there could be no debate.
If your pathetic cult had its way, we would still be accepting the aether, as there would be no debate allowed, and no possibility of an alternative model.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 27, 2022, 12:27:28 AM

Mr Blockhead had been raving about their existence and to date had not produced a single one nor has he produced actual “plenty real flat earth data”. If pretty obvious why he had not done this as none actually exist!

You mean Mr Moron has been lying about this to try and prop up their pathetic anti-science cult which worships scientists, all because he doesn't like reality.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 27, 2022, 12:27:28 AM

The proof of the world being a globe is overwhelming, it’s reality.

Which in no way excludes the possibility of a FE model, just like the atom being quantum mechanical in nature did not exclude the possibility of a classical model of the atom.

Yet again, instead of even trying to defend the BS you spouted which I objected to, you instead want to try demonstrating Earth is a globe and pretend I am saying it isn't.
Truly pathetic.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 27, 2022, 12:27:28 AM

No matter what heaps of illogic you throw out your collective prams the facts won’t change

No, no matter how much delusional religous BS you spout, no matter how heavily you cling to dishonest double standards, the facts wont change to suit your cult.
There will still be plenty of data that can be used to construct a FE model, and FE models will remain a possibility.

If you disagree, how about being honest for a change and providing a coherent, consistent set of requirements for something to meet in order to be deemed a model.
Then we can apply it to the products of those you worship.
Then, only if they pass, you can apply it to the FE to show how their can't be FE models.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 27, 2022, 12:41:22 AM

People at this very moment might be looking out the window of the ISS gazing down on a spherical earth.

Which in no way excludes the possibility of FE models existing.

Just like right now, people may be experimenting on atoms making observations which require a quantum mechanical description of the atom, but that doesn't exclude the possibility of classical models existing.

You behave like an enforcer  from the Orwellian Ministry of Truth. No matter how many fingers are held up it will always be the four you say it is.

The truth to you is an inconvenience and irrelevant.

Pictures of kittens, monkeys, penguins, insects ….  What does it matter? None of them have any bearing on the actual  truth.

These show the truth. Do you deny them?

https://www.sciencealert.com/25-of-the-most-iconic-images-of-earth-ever-taken-from-space/amp

You behave like an enforcer  from the Orwellian Ministry of Truth. No matter how many fingers are held up it will always be the four you say it is.

The truth to you is an inconvenience and irrelevant.

Pictures of kittens, monkeys, penguins, insects ….  What does it matter? None of them have any bearing on the actual  truth.

These show the truth. Do you deny them?

https://www.sciencealert.com/25-of-the-most-iconic-images-of-earth-ever-taken-from-space/amp

It’s a game you choose to play….

Pictures of kittens, monkeys, penguins, insects ….  What does it matter?

Pictures are just 2D images…

And they can be a rabbit hole.

Cottingley Fairies: How Sherlock Holmes's creator was fooled by hoax



n December 1920 Sir Arthur Conan Doyle unwittingly gave credence to one of the greatest hoaxes of the 20th Century when he published the now world-famous Cottingley Fairies photos.

These show the truth. Do you deny them?

https://www.sciencealert.com/25-of-the-most-iconic-images-of-earth-ever-taken-from-space/amp

I think you're missing the point that most FEr's are also space/NASA conspiracy theorists. It's kinda at the heart of the FE movement. They claim it's all fake, which for them, knocks out all images from up there. It's their easy-out, in their minds anyway.

Of course when you dig a little deeper it's pretty easy to refute, e.g., among many other aspects, the level of conspiracy necessary for the entire world's space agencies to collude in faking is just, well, you know, absurd. But space images alone don't seem to sway in the slightest.

The problem is that the argument began over whether there could be an FE model or not, and could that model be based on scientific data. 
If you cherry pick your days, then you can build a model from it.  It will be essentially incorrect, but you can build a model from cherry picked data. 
Where this strawman filled thing has gone to is rather astounding.  All three are calling each other closet FE supporters now.  Noone is honestly refuting the others points, well one is doing much better at it, but all sides have almost completely devolved into who can build the best strawman at this point. 

You behave like an enforcer  from the Orwellian Ministry of Truth.

From the tone, I'm pretty sure that is just more projection.
But I haven't read 1984.

The truth to you is an inconvenience and irrelevant.

And more projection.
You hate the truth and flee from it.
You dismiss me showing how the models of those you worship fail your standards as irrelavent, when it is quite relavent.

You then bring up entirely irrelavent points to try and prop up your failure by attacking a strawman.

Pictures of kittens, monkeys, penguins, insects ….  What does it matter? None of them have any bearing on the actual  truth.

Likewise, why do your pictures matter?
How do they establish that there cannot be FE models?

Again, the only way you can try and connect them is if you claim that there can't be FE models because Earth isn't flat, which also means all the evidence showing atoms can only be fully described by a quantum mechanical treatement means that the outdated models of the atom can't be models.

Again, Earth not being flat does not preclude the possibility of there being FE models.
Just like electrons not orbitting the nucelus of an atom in highly specific orbits, as classical particles, does not preclude the possibility of there being a model of the atom which contains such orbits. Just like atoms being composed of a tiny nucelus where virtually all of the mass of the atom, and the positive charge, is located does not preclude the possibility of a model of the atom which contains a large region of positive charge making up the bulk of the atom, with negative charges sprinkled around like a plum pudding.

So your images from space in no way support your claim that there cannot be FE models. All they do is serve to attack the strawman you have created.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 27, 2022, 02:26:15 PM

You behave like an enforcer  from the Orwellian Ministry of Truth.

From the tone, I'm pretty sure that is just more projection.
But I haven't read 1984.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 27, 2022, 02:26:15 PM

The truth to you is an inconvenience and irrelevant.

And more projection.
You hate the truth and flee from it.
You dismiss me showing how the models of those you worship fail your standards as irrelavent, when it is quite relavent.

You then bring up entirely irrelavent points to try and prop up your failure by attacking a strawman.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 27, 2022, 02:26:15 PM

Pictures of kittens, monkeys, penguins, insects ….  What does it matter? None of them have any bearing on the actual  truth.

Likewise, why do your pictures matter?
How do they establish that there cannot be FE models?

Again, the only way you can try and connect them is if you claim that there can't be FE models because Earth isn't flat, which also means all the evidence showing atoms can only be fully described by a quantum mechanical treatement means that the outdated models of the atom can't be models.

Again, Earth not being flat does not preclude the possibility of there being FE models.
Just like electrons not orbitting the nucelus of an atom in highly specific orbits, as classical particles, does not preclude the possibility of there being a model of the atom which contains such orbits. Just like atoms being composed of a tiny nucelus where virtually all of the mass of the atom, and the positive charge, is located does not preclude the possibility of a model of the atom which contains a large region of positive charge making up the bulk of the atom, with negative charges sprinkled around like a plum pudding.

So your images from space in no way support your claim that there cannot be FE models. All they do is serve to attack the strawman you have created.

Firstly they are not MY images. They are examples of the truth. A truth that you constantly reject calling it BS.
Hate the truth! I think not Mr. Blcokhead Ive been stating the truth from the beginning and you have been claiming and defending nothing more than a fictional fantasy. That is the truth.

The truth is the earth is a sphere and that is undeniable with evidence that is freely available if you care to look.

The scientific world knows the truth and operates on that truth with no dissent from any of the scientific community. Whole industries and corporations along with scientific institutions all work happily knowing the earth to be a sphere from direct day to day evidence. Thats the truth

The shape of the earth is only a question open for debate in the minds of a few fringe conspiracy theorists. Thats the truth

These are the lies and they are Your lies  which of course it is impossible for you to back up as any evidence is an impossibility.

Your Lies Mr Blockhead:-

“Flat earth has “PLENTY REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

The truth is flat earth belief is a belief and has NO real data. What you claim is a blatant lie.

The truth is it is an impossibility for Flat Earth belief to generate Andy scientific models. Again what you claim is a blatant lie.

Why is what you state lies? They are lies because it flies in the face of the truth despite all the kittens you want to throw at it.

This is the truth:-



Everything else is a fantasy. There is no debate about the shape of the earth just as there can be no question over the sun possibly being a cuboid. Its a sphere, the earth is a sphere and that is the truth.

The fact that you will call this BS and bowing down to idols or some such nonsense merely demonstrates the distain you have for the truth only caring about your four finger think what I think everything else is a lie agenda.

Ive said quite clearly it is an impossibility for them to exist as the earth is a sphere and has been known to be a sphere for a very very long time. No science supports flat earth thinking no science supports any flat earth notion and as such a scientific model supporting their flat earth notions is an impossibility.

Flat earth belief is anti science. You keep claiming they have Real Flat Earth Data supported Scientific Models, but never ever do you produce one. If you think they exist where are they? Go on produce one!

Firstly they are not MY images.

You sure do love clining to irrelavent crap.

It doesn't matter who's images they are. You are appealing to semantics which have no bearing on the argument.
The images have no bearing on the argument.
Instead they are just your attempt to attack a strawman you have set up and cling because you defened the delusional BS you spout.

They are examples of the truth. A truth that you constantly reject

Stop spouting pathetic lies.
If you wish to claim such blatant BS, justify it with a quote.

Hate the truth! I think not Mr. Blcokhead Ive been stating the truth from the beginning

No, you haven't.
You started this little tantrum with a blatant lie.
You then construct elaborate fantasies by setting up pathetic strawmen to attack, all while fleeing from what you actually claimed.

That is you running from the truth, the truth that you are wrong.

Conversely, I have been defending the truth, against your fantasy.

Yet again, you choose to flee from your inability to defend your claim that there can be no FE models.

These are the lies and they are Your lies which of course it is impossible for you to back up as any evidence is an impossibility.
Your Lies Mr Blockhead:-
“Flat earth has “PLENTY REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

You mean truths, mr moron. Truths that I have justified, with you just ignoring the justifications because you cannot refute them.
Truths you flee from because they are heresy for your cult.

The truth is that there is plenty of data, and certainly the possibility of obtaining data scientifically, which can be used to construct a FE model.
This is most simply understood by the simple fact that due to how large Earth is, plenty of measurements will not have the required precision to be able to distinguish between a RE and a FE.

Why is what you state lies? They are lies because it flies in the face of the truth despite all the kittens you want to throw at it.

I'm not the one stating lies. That would be you.
Lies, that because the FE is wrong, it is impossible for it to have FE models or any data at all which would be consistent with it.
Lies which support FEers like turbo who want to claim that because they can't measure the curvature with a laser level that means Earth is flat; and FEers like septic who claim Earth is flat because they can't measure the curve of water in their sink.

Ive said quite clearly it is an impossibility for them to exist as the earth is a sphere

Again, if this was true, that means the outdated models of the atom created by the scientists you worship and idolise cannot be models, as it is an impossibility for atoms to be that.

Flat earth belief is anti science.

Your cult is anti-science.

Now how about you stop with the blantant lies, stop with the pathetic deflection, and instead try justify the BS you claim.

Provide a coherent set of requirements for something to be deemed a model, and then we can apply them to the models of those you worship.

In physics, aether theories (also known as ether theories) propose the existence of a medium, a space-filling substance or field as a transmission medium for the propagation of electromagnetic or gravitational forces. Since the development of special relativity, theories using a substantial aether fell out of use in modern physics, and are now replaced by more abstract models.[1]

I’m not sure what point your making but let’s remember why the aether theories were proposed by reputable scientists in the first place. They were proposed to help explain the propagation of electromagnetic waves throughout the cosmos and bearing in mind when they were proposed and what was known at the time it was more than understandable. Even scientific   greats such as Maxwell was an advocate. Things move on and along came Einstein then space flight that put paid to any idea of the existence or need for ‘something’ to help the passage of electromagnetic energy.

That story has nothing whatsoever to do with any notions surrounding anything to do with any flat earth related ideas. The Flat earth belief is not based on any science all of its beliefs run contrary to all science. Flat earth belief is not driven by any science whatsoever rather it’s drivers are belief and pretend pseudoscience. Take a look at their website, not a scrap of science to be seen, just a bunch of unsupported nonsense. Why people continue to give the whole flat earth idea any scientific credibility is astonishing when in reality it has none. After all how can it when the earth is clearly a sphere!

The history of science  is littered with theories that have been overturned as new knowledge in discovered. The process is founded on facts and evidence.

I’m not sure what point your making

It's quite simple. AETHER ISN'T REAL!

Something being false (or fictional fantasy as you would describe it) does not mean you cannot have a scientific model of it or a scientific model which includes it.

If the entire basis of your rejection of the possibility of FE models is that Earth isn't flat, then you are fundamentally failing to demonstrate there cannot be FE models, unless you reject so many models of science. And for at least several of those models, they were still being used as scientific models while (or even only created as models after) data existed that demonstrated they were wrong.

Yet again, you wish to invoke special pleading, aka a dishonest double standard.
You want to reject any possibility of FE models existing or there being any data which can be used to support them, because such things would be heresy to your cult.
You try to defend this rejection by appealing to Earth not being flat, by appealing to these models being wrong.
But you refuse to allow this standard to be applied to the things you worship.

You are no better than a creationist claiming the world must have had a creator, by applying a standard that everything has a creator, only to turn around and claim your creator does not need one.

but let’s remember why the aether theories were proposed by reputable scientists in the first place.

Because even though the model was wrong, there was data which existed to support it.
i.e. a model being wrong does not preclude the possibility of data existing to support it to allow the creation of a model.
i.e. Earth not being flat does not preclude the possibility of data existing to support and allow the creation of a FE model.

i.e. it shows that your claim is entirely unsupported.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 28, 2022, 01:10:02 PM

I’m not sure what point your making

It's quite simple. AETHER ISN'T REAL!

Something being false (or fictional fantasy as you would describe it) does not mean you cannot have a scientific model of it or a scientific model which includes it.

If the entire basis of your rejection of the possibility of FE models is that Earth isn't flat, then you are fundamentally failing to demonstrate there cannot be FE models, unless you reject so many models of science. And for at least several of those models, they were still being used as scientific models while (or even only created as models after) data existed that demonstrated they were wrong.

Yet again, you wish to invoke special pleading, aka a dishonest double standard.
You want to reject any possibility of FE models existing or there being any data which can be used to support them, because such things would be heresy to your cult.
You try to defend this rejection by appealing to Earth not being flat, by appealing to these models being wrong.
But you refuse to allow this standard to be applied to the things you worship.

You are no better than a creationist claiming the world must have had a creator, by applying a standard that everything has a creator, only to turn around and claim your creator does not need one.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 28, 2022, 01:10:02 PM

but let’s remember why the aether theories were proposed by reputable scientists in the first place.

Because even though the model was wrong, there was data which existed to support it.
i.e. a model being wrong does not preclude the possibility of data existing to support it to allow the creation of a model.
i.e. Earth not being flat does not preclude the possibility of data existing to support and allow the creation of a FE model.

i.e. it shows that your claim is entirely unsupported.

There is a universe of difference between scientists around 150 years ago putting forward a theory based on best available evidence, as in the case of the aether, and a group of fantasy driven flat earth clowns proposing something so preposterous and obviously unscientific.
There is no comparison between the two. To say there is is madness in itself.

As soon as more evidence came available science moved on as it is driven by the best facts and evidence available. Flat earth belief is driven by fantasy and fiction and that combo does not a scientific model make! It has never had any evidence or facts to support any of its beliefs hence the impossibility of it producing anything remotely scientific. How can it make a scientific statement when it’s not grounded in science but is grounded in pure 100% fantasy!

What this shows is you have not the slightest understanding of anything being totally blinded by your own bigotry and your  ‘I have to be right and to hell with the truth’ way of non thinking.

The fact that you have been obviously  wrong on everything you have been claiming shines a bright light on your dishonesty and inability to accept the truth.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 28, 2022, 08:43:39 AM

Firstly they are not MY images.

You sure do love clining to irrelavent crap.

It doesn't matter who's images they are. You are appealing to semantics which have no bearing on the argument.
The images have no bearing on the argument.
Instead they are just your attempt to attack a strawman you have set up and cling because you defened the delusional BS you spout.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 28, 2022, 08:43:39 AM

They are examples of the truth. A truth that you constantly reject

Stop spouting pathetic lies.
If you wish to claim such blatant BS, justify it with a quote.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 28, 2022, 08:43:39 AM

Hate the truth! I think not Mr. Blcokhead Ive been stating the truth from the beginning

No, you haven't.
You started this little tantrum with a blatant lie.
You then construct elaborate fantasies by setting up pathetic strawmen to attack, all while fleeing from what you actually claimed.

That is you running from the truth, the truth that you are wrong.

Conversely, I have been defending the truth, against your fantasy.

Yet again, you choose to flee from your inability to defend your claim that there can be no FE models.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 28, 2022, 08:43:39 AM

These are the lies and they are Your lies which of course it is impossible for you to back up as any evidence is an impossibility.
Your Lies Mr Blockhead:-
“Flat earth has “PLENTY REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

You mean truths, mr moron. Truths that I have justified, with you just ignoring the justifications because you cannot refute them.
Truths you flee from because they are heresy for your cult.

The truth is that there is plenty of data, and certainly the possibility of obtaining data scientifically, which can be used to construct a FE model.
This is most simply understood by the simple fact that due to how large Earth is, plenty of measurements will not have the required precision to be able to distinguish between a RE and a FE.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 28, 2022, 08:43:39 AM

Why is what you state lies? They are lies because it flies in the face of the truth despite all the kittens you want to throw at it.

I'm not the one stating lies. That would be you.
Lies, that because the FE is wrong, it is impossible for it to have FE models or any data at all which would be consistent with it.
Lies which support FEers like turbo who want to claim that because they can't measure the curvature with a laser level that means Earth is flat; and FEers like septic who claim Earth is flat because they can't measure the curve of water in their sink.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 28, 2022, 08:43:39 AM

Ive said quite clearly it is an impossibility for them to exist as the earth is a sphere

Again, if this was true, that means the outdated models of the atom created by the scientists you worship and idolise cannot be models, as it is an impossibility for atoms to be that.

Quote from: Timeisup on November 28, 2022, 08:43:39 AM

Flat earth belief is anti science.

Your cult is anti-science.

Now how about you stop with the blantant lies, stop with the pathetic deflection, and instead try justify the BS you claim.

Provide a coherent set of requirements for something to be deemed a model, and then we can apply them to the models of those you worship.

You say:-

“The images have no bearing on the argument.”

That’s a lie only you believe! The images show the truth. An inconvenient truth that has been know about for 2000 years,  and that science and technology have proved beyond any doubt. And you claim it has no bearing! Only because the truth means little to you.

It reveals no strawman it shows the truth one denied by all flat earth believers for some fantasy driven belief. You  continue to claim:-

“Flat earth has “PLENTY REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

How can it have real scientific data when none of what it believes is based on any science? It’s all based on made up fantasy driven belief! At no time did any of its beliefs rest on any science. It has always rested on fantasy.

I have challenged you on numerous occasions to present YOUR PLENTY REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and YOU HAVE FAILED TO PRODUCE A SINGLE SHRED!

I have challenged you to give an example of  an alleged   scientific FE model. Once more you failed. You failed because none exist. All you can do is say they exist without ever offering any evidence to support your claim. All you ever do is keep repeating these BS mantras over and over again in some vain attempt to convince yourself.

The simple fact that you call a lie is that the world has been known to be a sphere for 2000 years. True or false?

Since the advent of astronomy, that FE advocates of course call a pseudoscience,  evidence has been used to build a picture of the solar system and more recently the cosmos at large. Technology and space travel have enabled science to build a reasonably accurate picture of both the earth and its environment. And that is the truth and a scientific truth that is ignored by the flat earth advocates. All of which is true.

Flat earth belief is clearly anti-science. NONE of its beliefs are based on science. If FE belief used science they would discover the error of their ways, pack up and go home. All of which is again true.

You now say this:-

“The truth is that there is plenty of data, and certainly the possibility of obtaining data scientifically, which can be used to construct a FE model.”

If you think this lie is a truth then present the evidence. Whats stopping you?

Stop the continual lying and distortions and back up your claim with evidence.

There is a universe of difference between scientists around 150 years ago putting forward a theory based on best available evidence, as in the case of the aether, and a group of fantasy driven flat earth clowns proposing something so preposterous and obviously unscientific.
There is no comparison between the two. To say there is is madness in itself.

To say there is no comparison is madness itself.

As soon as more evidence came available science moved on as it is driven by the best facts and evidence available.

No it didn't.
Plenty clung to the aether, even after it needed so many insane things, and there was evidence showing it doesn't work.

But the most important part of the comparison is still valid.
In these cases, data existed which lead to the creation of a model which doesn't match reality.

i.e. being wrong is not enough to preclude the possibility of data existing which can be used to construct a model, it doesn't preclude the possibility of a model existing.

What this shows is you have not the slightest understanding of anything being totally blinded by your own bigotry and your  ‘I have to be right and to hell with the truth’ way of non thinking.
The fact that you have been obviously  wrong on everything you have been claiming shines a bright light on your dishonesty and inability to accept the truth.

You sure do love your projection don't you?

You say:-
“The images have no bearing on the argument.”
That’s a lie only you believe!

No, that is not a lie.
The argument is not if Earth is flat or round.
The argument is about if there can be a FE model.
Showing that Earth is flat does not preclude the possibility of a FE model.
Just like demonstrating that Bohr's model of the atom is wrong doesn't preclude the possibility of it being a model.
Just like demonstrating that the aether doesn't exist doesn't preclude the possibility of scientific models existing which use aether.

As such, this has no bearing on the argument.

If I was claiming that Earth is flat, rather than just objecting to your BS claim that there can't be FE models, then it would have bearing. But that is not the case.
If instead you were claiming that a model must be true, and all these outdated beliefs from science are not models because they aren't true, then it would have bearing. But that is not the case either.

It reveals no strawman

You are blatantly lying when you claim I am rejecting the truth, with your dishonest implication that I think Earth is flat.
You are setting up a strawman, where you pretend I think Earth is flat, for you to defeat by providing evidence that Earth isn't flat.

But that has never been my claim or my argument.

You continue to claim:-

“Flat earth has “PLENTY REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and  “There can be a scientific FE model"

And you know what the evidence is, you are unable to show a single fault with it, nor can you actually justify the BS you have spouted which lead to those statements.

Instead you just deflect, setting up pathetic strawmen to knock down.

I have challenged you on numerous occasions to present YOUR PLENTY REAL FLAT EARTH DATA” and YOU HAVE FAILED TO PRODUCE A SINGLE SHRED!

And I presented it numerous times, and you just ignored it, repeatedly, and instead just continue to spout this pathetic lie.

I have challenged you

And given that I had met your challenge to provide the data, and you just dishoenstly pretend it doesn't exist, I see no reason to try performing any more tricks for you.
Deal with the challenged which have already been met before demanding more.

Conversely, you have been challenged to provide a coherent, consistent set of requirements something must meet in order to be deemed a model, which can then be applied to the products of the idols you worship; and you have continually deflecting, never providing this because you know it will defeat you by exposing your dishonest double standard.
Either the prodcuts of your idols will fail which you can never allow, or the FE can pass, which you can never allow.

The simple fact that you call a lie is that the world has been known to be a sphere for 2000 years. True or false?

FALSE!
If you wish to claim such pure BS, then provide a direct quote to justify it.

And regardless, yet again, this is a pathetic deflection and a strawman.

Try sticking to the topic.

Instead of focusing on if Earth is flat or round, instead focus on if there can be FE models.

If you think this lie is a truth then present the evidence. Whats stopping you?

I have. If you think I haven't, then explain why, making sure you are responding to what I have said, rather than your pathetic lie that it doesn't exist.

Stop the continual lying and distortions and back up your claim with evidence.

And more pathteic projection.
How about you follow your own advice, and provide a coherent, consistent set of requirements for something to meet to be deemed a model which can then be applied to the products of those you worship.

Either way, stop lying by falsely claiming that I have indicated Earth is flat.
Stop lying by falsely claiming I reject science.
Stop lying by falsely claiming I haven't provided data.

All that does is show your dishonesty and show how pathetic your position is.

Scientists can have a scientific model even if it is "wrong".