The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: snores on February 16, 2007, 06:19:25 PM
-
Other than all the "gangstas", I had a few friends who were intrigued. One of those friends would be up to joining me and some others in a debate. My proposal is this: 5 REers, 5 FEers, it would be nice to get somebody unbiased to judge, but I don't know if such a person exists. Of course, because of all the spammers running loose on the forums, it may be difficult to have an intelligent debate here. We could do the debate on AIM or IRC or something. I already have one person on the RE team. Once we get both teams full, we can decide the venue for our debate.
Teams so far:
RE
Me
My friend
Temaki
Pablo the Incredible
Ed.Man
RE FULL!!
FE
TheEngineer
GeoGuy
Tom Bishop
bads3ctor
-
Okay, I'm an intrigued Round Earther.
I know I have a reputation as a troll (and I am), but I can be serious when I want to be.
-
Thanks, hopefully the FEers won't be too chicken to show up..
-
I believe that the RE model is the right one.
-
What do you think we do here?
-
What do you think we do here?
It certainly isn't debating. Most FE'ers dance in circles, and maybe snores thinks a smaller group could do better to debate than unmitigated masses.
-
Pablo and theengineer, do you guys wanna sign up, or are you just posting here for fun?
-
Sign me up snores. RE team.
-
What do you think we do here?
It certainly isn't debating. Most FE'ers dance in circles, and maybe snores thinks a smaller group could do better to debate than unmitigated masses.
What he said. Its much easier to argue when you don't have tons of people being obnoxious.
-
I argue FE. That's why I'm here.
-
I'll go ahead and sign up on the FE side (depending on when you're planning to have this thing).
-
Thanks TheEngineer and GeoGuy.
-
I am interested in a closed-knit debate. Sign me up for the FE model.
-
Any debate on this with competent debaters (I'm on my high school's debate team, and our school is pretty damn good.), wouldn't be very interesting. The RE side would always win.
Why? Because, the FE theory fails where most conspiracy theories (And here, I include religion as well) fail. It poses something drastically different than our normal understanding of reality. Ok, that in itself isn't so bad, but you gotta ask: How did we get that normal understanding in the first place?
All of our current understandings of the workings of the universe and earth come from science and logic.
The FE'ers may look at the fact and say, "Well, the theory is pretty flawless, there are only a couple contradictions/things that don't make sense."
However, for a theory to stand, it must be perfectly flawless. That is why we have so many discarded theories from the past.
Anyways, the point is, debating this topic at a school wouldn't last very long.
-
Thanks, Tom. Two more FE and one more RE and we can start. Any ideas for where this debate is gonna go down?
-
However, for a theory to stand, it must be perfectly flawless. That is why we have so many discarded theories from the past.
RE is not perfectly flawless. :roll:
Anyways, the point is, debating this topic at a school wouldn't last very long.
That's because schools are as dogmatic as a religion.
-
You might try the FES IRC channel (there's a link in the Everything Else section).
However, I doubt you'll get two more FE's, as I don't see any logged in right now.
-
Ok Tom, how about you...rattle off a few flaws in the Round Earth model.
-
I'm good with IRC if everybody else is. I think I could start my own channel, and we could do it there if we want maximum privacy.
FEers, I don't see many more FEers logged in, how much would you object if you are short two people. Waiting for more isn't a big problem, but it could be a while.
-
I'm fine waiting. When's the debate?
Oh, but I can't be there next week, I'm travelling.
-
Ok Tom, how about you...rattle off a few flaws in the Round Earth model.
In the RE model the mechanism for gravity is explained by a hypothetical, imaginary particle called the "gravitron." It apparently pulls objects closer to the center of the earth or some such nonsense. No evidence for this particle has been found.
-
I was thinking ASAP, tonight if possible. I can't do tomorrow, but almost any other day when I'm not at school is fine for me.
Location of the debate is on IRC.
Server:phoenix.il.us.SwiftIRC.net
Channel: #FEvsRE
If anybody does not have IRC or has any objections post now.
-
I would like to join as a field tester for some of the gravity theories.
-
Just send me the link and I'm there...but I've only got like 40-50 min so make it quick if at all possible.
-
bads3ctor, you're joining for FE right?
-
Lets do it Sunday at 6pm. Hardly any FE proponents are on right now.
-
Time zone?
-
EST
-
Yes....as FE. I can test the gravity theories from 14,000 feet at a terminal velocity of between 100 MPH and about 207 MPH.
-
Sorry guys, but I can't make it.
Unless you can register free.
-
Well, if this debate is actually gonna happen then... I want in.
-
Register for what?
What team Ed.Man?
-
IRC...or don't you need to register?
-
I think Sunday would be fine for me, but I'll keep checking for any changes.
-
You don't need to register for IRC. http://www.mirc.com/ Just download the 30 day free trial of MIRC (its pretty easy to set up) PM me if you have any problems.
-
My bad. For RE.
-
Thanks Ed.Man.
Everybody in the debate should subscribe to this thread or bookmark it or something, because when we all leave for the night, it will probably be buried in the waves of spam...
-
Any gravitational theories that need to be tested may have to wait until things warm up a bit(very cold @ 14,000 ft). Also, my dropzone is closed Monday and Tuesday.
-
Well, it seems pretty hard to have a debate unless you agree on general terms. For example, using real life examples wouldn't work considering you'd have to assume that your side is right.
I'd join the RE team but it's full, if a space opens up could someone PM me?
Also, who going to moderate this? You need someone nuetral, or at least open to enough ideas.
Hector
-
Yeah Perpetually Dreaming, but with most people raised from birth to know the Earth is flat, and those who weren't being pretty adamant in their beliefs, it'll be kinda hard.
Well people, I'm gonna sign off for the night. Tenative place, time, and date:
IRC
Server:phoenix.il.us.SwiftIRC.net
channel: #FEvsRE
Time 6 PM EST.
Everybody be sure to bookmark this thread, if the time or location need to be changed, go ahead, I'll see the change in the morning.
Goodbye, and thanks for your cooperation, I'm sure this debate will be interesting and fun for all of us.
Snores.
-
Well, it seems pretty hard to have a debate unless you agree on general terms. For example, using real life examples wouldn't work considering you'd have to assume that your side is right.
I think a big issue in this debate is going to be the criteria for acceptable evidence. I think this criteria (and any other "general terms") should be discussed in this thread only by those participating in the debate.
-
Well, it seems pretty hard to have a debate unless you agree on general terms. For example, using real life examples wouldn't work considering you'd have to assume that your side is right.
I think a big issue in this debate is going to be the criteria for acceptable evidence. I think this criteria (and any other "general terms") should be discussed in this thread only by those participating in the debate.
Yes....We need some kind of field testing or the discussion is just speculation. For video at high altitude for curvature tests, I know a very honest and experienced skydive instructor with a good Sony camera. The problem is conspiracy theories about the alteration of the video footage.
-
Well, what would be considered "aceptable evidence"? Flat Earthers don't believe any news network, photograph or opinion, no matter how official the source (the moreso, the worse, it would seem), and Flat Earthers don't really have any evidence to speak of beyond "It's a conspiracy, Rowbotham, etc."
That's a pretty big hurdle to leap, for both sides.
-
Well, you can debate w/o evidence. Use logic + common sense + really common info.
I plan to debate using the argument that the Sun could not exist in the FE model.
I could go in to details, but I'm sleepy, as it's almost 10:30 here. Yes, I do get sleepy at 10:30, cause I'm only 14... and an abnormally sleepy 14 year-old at that. Hopefully, my age has no effect on my eligibility for the debate.
-
Well, what would be considered "aceptable evidence"? Flat Earthers don't believe any news network, photograph or opinion, no matter how official the source (the moreso, the worse, it would seem), and Flat Earthers don't really have any evidence to speak of beyond "It's a conspiracy, Rowbotham, etc."
That's a pretty big hurdle to leap, for both sides.
I have 1 idea. For curvature and gravity tests, how about video footage from many different views and angles at the same time. Angles from the ground and a few at altitude.
-
That might work, plus we could probably get someone in the law department to check the vadility of the footage. Though, I don't know if the people here have those sort of connections. Also, another problem is that that would take a while to do, and it would delay the dabate for awhile. Just like in court.
-
Here is an example of video evidence that can not be faked:
http://www.brentfinley.com/300way.htm
What I mean is the video that these shots were taken from. With so many angles of the same event, The NSA wouldn't have the computing power to fabricate or alter the evidence.
-
We would have to decide what camera lens is acceptable so we would not get any wide angle distortion. I have seen posts from some people complaining about fake wide angle shots showing curvature. Any optic experts online right now?
-
Here is the kind of shot I am talking about.
http://www.brentfinley.com/images/300way/300-10.jpg
If all the camera equipment can be verified and it is done at a high enough altitude(say 40,00 ft) with many video shots and angles OF THE SAME EVENT, I think fabrication or alteration would be imposible with our current computer or alien technology.
-
Never underestimate technology. But ya, I think that type of evidence should be sufficient for a debate like this. Plus, It'd be nice not have thousands of people say that a picture is photoshoped. Also, like I said before, both sides have to agree that this is legit evidence. So, if everyone agree's with bads3ctor's idea, post it.
-
Oops...I may have to change sides on this debate. Half of the skydivers in this jump:
http://www.brentfinley.com/images/300way/300-10.jpg
Were probably wearing video/film cameras. If I could locate most of them, get the footage(about 150 video shots of the same high altitude event) with the curvature very evident in the shots then the earth is a sphere or 1 hell of a conspiracy is going on!
-
Nope. You guys are all wrong. It's just an optical illusion done with dummies and toy soldiers. And they're falling upwards into an illusion of the sea (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=120964&sid=a16d877481bce8a7d41ac7403e44ca94).
Sorry....Dummies and toy soldiers can't move and track and form a formation in an atmosphere unless we have cyborg tech from alpha centauri...and if that is going to be used as an argument then I'm done!
-
I'm telling you guys, you're all going about this the wrong way. Even by myself, I can disprove FE Theory in a debate without any pics, videos, or even outside references. All you need to reference are common phenomena that are visible to the naked eye.
Here are some major things that contradict FE Theory;
- Sun's Energy
- Lunar/solar eclipses
- Moon Phases
- constellations
- Tides and seasons
With these alone, it is very easy to disprove FE Theory. Videos and images are not needed for this debate.
-
I'm telling you guys, you're all going about this the wrong way. Even by myself, I can disprove FE Theory in a debate without any pics, videos, or even outside references. All you need to reference are common phenomena that are visible to the naked eye.
Here are some major things that contradict FE Theory;
- Sun's Energy
- Lunar/solar eclipses
- Moon Phases
- constellations
- Tides and seasons
With these alone, it is very easy to disprove FE Theory. Videos and images are not needed for this debate.
You are missing the point.....evidence that can be PROVEN to a monkey or snail with 100% accuracy with NO possibility of some other explanation is the only thing that will work. Otherwise you get stuff like toy soldiers and dummies....Which I thought was very creative but easily debunked.
-
Sorry....Dummies and toy soldiers can't move and track and form a formation in an atmosphere unless we have cyborg tech from alpha centauri...and if that is going to be used as an argument then I'm done!
You guys obviously need to get out more if you can't tell sarcasm.
It is sarcasm to RE but real evidence to FE. I guess U are RE. I thought it was hilarious :-)
-
Sorry Eddie, but you're wrong. I've said this so many times now: This argument can't be won. To prove my point (and sorry if anyone uses this in the debate but...):
- Sun's Energy (Too much is unknown about the sun, considering the temperature would be impossible to survive in to test anything on it)
- Lunar/solar eclipses (With the accelaration theory in mind, its possible for the sun/moon to be covered up without the Earth being round)
- Moon Phases (Moon phases are relative to the sun, not the earth. Again, the sun can be obstructed without the shape of the earth)
- constellations (Well....can't think of anything right now. I'll edit this later)
- Tides and seasons (It's possible for the heat concentration to change even if the Earth is flat. For all we know, the temperature is space changes but because of the vastness, only affects us. Also wind causes tides and wind is affected by heat, as seen in hurricane katrina, so with the previous theory in mind, these prove nothing)
Information is relative, photos would be the best way to go.
-
Sorry Eddie, but you're wrong. I've said this so many times now: This argument can't be won. To prove my point (and sorry if anyone uses this in the debate but...):
- Sun's Energy (Too much is unknown about the sun, considering the temperature would be impossible to survive in to test anything on it)
- Lunar/solar eclipses (With the accelaration theory in mind, its possible for the sun/moon to be covered up without the Earth being round)
- Moon Phases (Moon phases are relative to the sun, not the earth. Again, the sun can be obstructed without the shape of the earth)
- constellations (Well....can't think of anything right now. I'll edit this later)
- Tides and seasons (It's possible for the heat concentration to change even if the Earth is flat. For all we know, the temperature is space changes but because of the vastness, only affects us. Also wind causes tides and wind is affected by heat, as seen in hurricane katrina, so with the previous theory in mind, these prove nothing)
Information is relative, photos would be the best way to go.
I see how you and others misunderstood. I'm not arguing facts, or info. It is obvious that the FE'ers cannot be swayed by info. What I meant by all those points, is that the FE Theory contains contradictions about them.
-
Sorry Eddie, but you're wrong. I've said this so many times now: This argument can't be won. To prove my point (and sorry if anyone uses this in the debate but...):
- Sun's Energy (Too much is unknown about the sun, considering the temperature would be impossible to survive in to test anything on it)
- Lunar/solar eclipses (With the accelaration theory in mind, its possible for the sun/moon to be covered up without the Earth being round)
- Moon Phases (Moon phases are relative to the sun, not the earth. Again, the sun can be obstructed without the shape of the earth)
- constellations (Well....can't think of anything right now. I'll edit this later)
- Tides and seasons (It's possible for the heat concentration to change even if the Earth is flat. For all we know, the temperature is space changes but because of the vastness, only affects us. Also wind causes tides and wind is affected by heat, as seen in hurricane katrina, so with the previous theory in mind, these prove nothing)
Information is relative, photos would be the best way to go.
I agree. Short of putting 100 hard core FE'rs in space suits and loading them on a space shuttle and blasting them into orbit(which could be faked with brainwashing), this debate can not be won by either side. Hell, the brainwashing arguments fix everything! But I guarantee that you can't brainwash 300 experienced skydivers!
-
I believe that you are both wrong. This debate can and will be won.
You see, you both seem to have a misconception about how debates work. Winning a debate is NOT proving that you are right. Winning a debate is about proving that your opponent is WRONG. Which, in this case, can definitely be done.
When you have to prove yourself right, any evidence you present could theoretically be refuted for some reason. However, if you're proving your opponent's wrong, then all you must do is find a logical contradiction within their argument.
Once that is done, the debate is won.
-
Sorry Eddie, but you're wrong. I've said this so many times now: This argument can't be won. To prove my point (and sorry if anyone uses this in the debate but...):
- Sun's Energy (Too much is unknown about the sun, considering the temperature would be impossible to survive in to test anything on it)
- Lunar/solar eclipses (With the accelaration theory in mind, its possible for the sun/moon to be covered up without the Earth being round)
- Moon Phases (Moon phases are relative to the sun, not the earth. Again, the sun can be obstructed without the shape of the earth)
- constellations (Well....can't think of anything right now. I'll edit this later)
- Tides and seasons (It's possible for the heat concentration to change even if the Earth is flat. For all we know, the temperature is space changes but because of the vastness, only affects us. Also wind causes tides and wind is affected by heat, as seen in hurricane katrina, so with the previous theory in mind, these prove nothing)
Information is relative, photos would be the best way to go.
I see how you and others misunderstood. I'm not arguing facts, or info. It is obvious that the FE'ers cannot be swayed by info. What I meant by all those points, is that the FE Theory contains contradictions about them.
The point of the debate is to win with a crushing victory that can not be denied no matter what. By the way...this site is a hoax anyway and used as entertainment. But just in case there is someone out there that really believes in FE(which I hope there aren't too many) then the photo evidence that can not be faked is the way to go.
-
u7tkl
-
I believe that you are both wrong. This debate can and will be won.
You see, you both seem to have a misconception about how debates work. Winning a debate is NOT proving that you are right. Winning a debate is about proving that your opponent is WRONG. Which, in this case, can definitely be done.
When you have to prove yourself right, any evidence you present could theoretically be refuted for some reason. However, if you're proving your opponent's wrong, then all you must do is find a logical contradiction within their argument.
Once that is done, the debate is won.
OK...you have a very valid point and ALMOST convinced me. Any real FE'rs will not accept logical contradiction no matter what. If FE'rs really do exist then they have to be snapped out of it with a crushing blow of reality.
-
Wait what...I thought you were arguing for the FE side. Or is that just to see your debating skills?
Also Eddie, good point. I agree with you, but you also have to take into account that more than half the threads on here have contradictions with our theory, and regardless of whether you can win or not, it seems like a waste of time to fight over 100 contradictions, just for the sake of being right.
And If this site is a hoax, that would suck. This whole time I've been trying to figure out the psycology of it all.
-
Wait what...I thought you were arguing for the FE side. Or is that just to see your debating skills?
Also Eddie, good point. I agree with you, but you also have to take into account that more than half the threads on here have contradictions with our theory, and regardless of whether you can win or not, it seems like a waste of time to fight over 100 contradictions, just for the sake of being right.
And If this site is a hoax, that would suck. This whole time I've been trying to figure out the psycology of it all.
I have another theory about this site. The site admin is obviously RE if you carefully read his posts. Im not a slouch at software and hardware design so maybe it is a way to infect windows boxes through Internet Explorer. BTW, I'm running a version of Linux(won't say which but the admin can tell from his logs)
and use Windows only in Vmware.
-
I believe that you are both wrong. This debate can and will be won.
You see, you both seem to have a misconception about how debates work. Winning a debate is NOT proving that you are right. Winning a debate is about proving that your opponent is WRONG. Which, in this case, can definitely be done.
When you have to prove yourself right, any evidence you present could theoretically be refuted for some reason. However, if you're proving your opponent's wrong, then all you must do is find a logical contradiction within their argument.
Once that is done, the debate is won.
OK...you have a very valid point and ALMOST convinced me. Any real FE'rs will not accept logical contradiction no matter what. If FE'rs really do exist then they have to be snapped out of it with a crushing blow of reality.
I agree with you fully. But understand, that the contradictions that I have found ARE crushing blows of reality. Even if FE'ers don't believe in logic, no one can believe in contradicting statements like:
"This car is there."
"This car isn't there."
-
Who is the admin?
-
Who is the admin?
Check out this post and notice what is under his name on the left.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1361&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=e975e627d5b249706429fa3ce25f8777
-
Who is the admin?
Check out this post and notice what is under his name on the left.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1361&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=e975e627d5b249706429fa3ce25f8777
I just joined twenty minutes ago.
-
bads3ctor, you still haven't answered my question as to why you're arguing for the FE side if your against it.
-
Let me quote the "Site Admin" in that post:
"We've discussed this sort of thing before. Basically, real science has rules that you have to follow if you want to convince others that your ideas should be taken seriously. FE "science" has rules as well; they're just different (and inferior, but that's the subject of a different debate). If you want to convince FEers, you have to beat them at their own game, since they're not sufficiently rational to play by the rest of the world's rules."
If he is running this site then something is up!
-
bads3ctor, you still haven't answered my question as to why you're arguing for the FE side if your against it.
Sorry....read my last post....for me it's just good clean fun. The site admin I quoted in my last post should bring up a red flag as to what this site is all about.
-
And my last fun was neither good nor clean! :-(
-
Good point about the admin. It seems like this forum is just one huge psycology project then. It's also sort of a game, seems like a really good idea by the admin, though I don't know how he found so many people who actualy believe it.
As for your part in the debate, I think it's kindof wierd to have you argue FE but trying to proove RE, but whatever. I might join FE as well if nobody else does, I'm always open to new ideas.
-
Good point about the admin. It seems like this forum is just one huge psycology project then. It's also sort of a game, seems like a really good idea by the admin, though I don't know how he found so many people who actualy believe it.
As for your part in the debate, I think it's kindof wierd to have you argue FE but trying to proove RE, but whatever. I might join FE as well if nobody else does, I'm always open to new ideas.
I wanted in but all the RE slots were taken so FE was it!
-
Same
Btw, how old are you, cuz it seems we have basicaly the same point of view.
-
Same
Btw, how old are you, cuz it seems we have basicaly the same point of view.
12 going on an age larger than that! :cry:
-
heh, I have the same opinion as someone 2 years younger than me.
Well, just to be a part of the dabate, I sign on to FE side whenever possible. Don't want to miss this.
-
heh, I have the same opinion as someone 2 years younger than me.
Well, just to be a part of the dabate, I sign on to FE side whenever possible. Don't want to miss this.
I already busted the debate with my skydiving evidence. It can't be disputed. I have exited a King Air(thats a turboprop aircraft that holds 14 skydivers) at 16,500 feet and have seen with my own eyes the curvature of out earth.
-
Thats "of" the earth. I could do a HALO jump(High altitude low opening) exiting @ 40,000 feet AGL(above ground level) and I GUARANTEE all doubts will be gone!
-
Don't underestimate the power on ignorance though. Your evidence seems incontrovertible to you, but to others it could seem flawed. Plus with the NASA idea thats posted on the FAQ, it states that NASA has incredible photoshopping software, and that your pictures could easily be a hoax.
Anyway, theres nobody in this thread anymore besides you and me. So I'm gonna go leave now.
-
Let me explain better then that last post(It's late,and I don't type very well).
There is not enough oxygen above 14,000 feet so most skydives are made at or below that altitude. All someone needs to do is get trained in High altitude oxygen assisted jumps and get in an aircraft that can go to 40,000 ft and jump out and.....wala.....no more doubt about FE or RE! If someone believes in FE then with this kind of evidence....your own eyeballs.....you still believe in FE then you are not mentally balanced.