The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: thedanman344 on October 14, 2006, 02:03:28 PM

Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: thedanman344 on October 14, 2006, 02:03:28 PM
Just one question: why?

What would the "evil governments of the world" have to gain from a round earth? I mean, how is lying about a round Earth beneficial at all to the government?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Chri5peed on October 14, 2006, 02:24:29 PM
I'd like to know this too.

Just one thing though, you can't just say;

a - Its part of a Conspiracy
b - Its a fake and/or photoshopped.
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: holybrain on October 14, 2006, 02:39:01 PM
Quote from: "thedanman344"
Just one question: why?

What would the "evil governments of the world" have to gain from a round earth? I mean, how is lying about a round Earth beneficial at all to the government?


USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION!!!
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Mephistopheles on October 14, 2006, 03:24:00 PM
Someone, quick, shoot me.
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: phaseshifter on October 14, 2006, 04:24:53 PM
Quote from: "holybrain"
Quote from: "thedanman344"
Just one question: why?

What would the "evil governments of the world" have to gain from a round earth? I mean, how is lying about a round Earth beneficial at all to the government?


USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION!!!


That would not be useful actually, as it seems that this question is never answered. Or how it is that countries who hate each other guts still cooperate to keep their population in the dark.
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Chri5peed on October 14, 2006, 04:27:17 PM
Quote from: "phaseshifter"

That would not be useful actually, as it seems that this question is never answered. Or how it is that countries who hate each other guts still cooperate to keep their population in the dark.


Its part of the conspiracy. Iran & Iraq love each other really.
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: GeoGuy on October 14, 2006, 07:58:26 PM
Quote from: "thedanman344"
Just one question: why?

What would the "evil governments of the world" have to gain from a round earth? I mean, how is lying about a round Earth beneficial at all to the government?


*sigh* No one knows what the world's governments would gain from a massive conspiracy covering up Earth's true shape. However, the fact remains that if Earth is flat there is a conspiracy. End of story.

And to answer your next question, yes, disproving the conspiracy would weaken the FE theory. However, this cannot be done because if Earth is flat there is a conspiracy.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Enraged Youth on October 14, 2006, 09:30:39 PM
Hmm, that kinda makes more sense since someone who has, y'know, thought about this explains the conspiracy thing.

However, I still maintain that the 'conspiracy' thing is something made up in the first days of FE as a quick, unexpectedly demanded, response.

"So why do you think we think the earth is round?"
"Oh, fuck, I didn't think about this! Uh, because...oh! Government conspiracy, that's why!"

It would be far more plausible to say "We think the earth is round, because the most definitive evidence we have points to a spherical earth. I think the earth is flat because [supporting evidence here]"

Government Conspiracy?

Bollocks.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Ixion on October 15, 2006, 12:02:51 AM
If the scientifice institution had made a gross error like that and had based so many things on it already wouldnt the truth destroy the credibility of that institution?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: beast on October 15, 2006, 12:18:55 AM
I think the point about the conspiracy is that what it's really saying is "don't give us somebody elses information, come up with an arguement that we can test ourselves."  People have gone into space and taken photos of the Earth - great for them.  I haven't and there is a good chance I never will.  I don't fly enough to test the flight times from Japan to San Fransisco.  I can't see the night sky from different places on Earth at the same time.  In theory these may be valid ways of finding out the shape of the Earth but for the majority of us they are not practical tests we can carry out.  There is a huge error in taking this forum literally and believing it is a place for promoting the message the Earth is flat.  This is much more a forum about philosophy and scientific method than about the shape of the Earth.  It may or may not have started that way but that's how it is now.  The people I look up to on this forum clearly have a very good understanding of physics and many other issues.  It's not about being right or wrong, it's about having to use your brain.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Mythix Profit on October 15, 2006, 05:50:41 PM
I agree w/ Beast here.

The bulk of RE posts seem not to grasp the fundemental nature of argument or debate here.

Most of these are asking "How could the earth be Flat?" as rhetorical not  hypothetical.

Unfurtunately for RE Arguers this platform is "Flat", not level. The burden of dis-proof is on you;convince the FEs using evidence from FE theory, not mere RE rote.

If some one can't take time to research the database of the oppositional view(FAQ, Search, Links, etc.)prior to posting; why should I be bothered w/ their time-wasting queries?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: holybrain on October 15, 2006, 06:00:06 PM
Quote from: "Mythix Profit"
If some one can't take time to research the database of the oppositional view(FAQ, Search, Links, etc.)prior to posting; why should I be bothered w/ their time-wasting queries?


That's what I've been telling these people! But they just keeping on coming and coming and coming.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Mythix Profit on October 15, 2006, 06:48:59 PM
Yep,

The Conspiracy Conspiracy squanders billions in currency to provide such paltry schooling everywhere and this is what we get.
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Yardstick2006 on October 16, 2006, 06:13:51 AM
Quote from: "GeoGuy"
Quote from: "thedanman344"
Just one question: why?

What would the "evil governments of the world" have to gain from a round earth? I mean, how is lying about a round Earth beneficial at all to the government?


*sigh* No one knows what the world's governments would gain from a massive conspiracy covering up Earth's true shape. However, the fact remains that if Earth is flat there is a conspiracy. End of story.

And to answer your next question, yes, disproving the conspiracy would weaken the FE theory. However, this cannot be done because if Earth is flat there is a conspiracy.


You're a fucking retard if that is the kind of logic you FEtards are spouting.

'we are right so anything that says otherwise is part of a conspirasy'

Dick.
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: GeoGuy on October 16, 2006, 07:39:09 AM
Quote from: "Yardstick2006"


You're a f**king retard if that is the kind of logic you FEtards are spouting.

'we are right so anything that says otherwise is part of a conspirasy'

Dick.


Sadly, Yardstick, I did not say what you want me to have said. But thanks anyway for quoting my post to make a completely random comment that had nothing in particular to do with anything.
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: phaseshifter on October 16, 2006, 08:16:02 AM
Quote from: "GeoGuy"
Quote from: "Yardstick2006"


You're a f**king retard if that is the kind of logic you FEtards are spouting.

'we are right so anything that says otherwise is part of a conspirasy'

Dick.


Sadly, Yardstick, I did not say what you want me to have said. But thanks anyway for quoting my post to make a completely random comment that had nothing in particular to do with anything.


disproving the conspiracy would weaken the FE theory. However, this cannot be done because if Earth is flat there is a conspiracy

Well, what you seem to be saying, correct me if I'm wrong, is that the conspiracy cannot be disproved because you're right (and the earth is flat).

Also, that statment contains an IF clause, which doesn't help confirm it'S validity.

It is the same as saying:

confirming the conspiracy would weaken the RE theory. However, this cannot be done because if Earth is spherical there is no conspiracy.

Would YOU accept this argument from us?.
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: GeoGuy on October 16, 2006, 08:29:04 AM
Quote from: "phaseshifter"


disproving the conspiracy would weaken the FE theory. However, this cannot be done because if Earth is flat there is a conspiracy

Well, what you seem to be saying, correct me if I'm wrong, is that the conspiracy cannot be disproved because you're right (and the earth is flat).


That is not at all what I'm saying. I said that if Earth is flat there is a conspiracy, in order to prove the conspiracy wrong you have to first prove that Earth is not flat. Meaning that the conspiracy is useless as a way of proving or disproving either theory.



Quote
confirming the conspiracy would weaken the RE theory. However, this cannot be done because if Earth is spherical there is no conspiracy.

Would YOU accept this argument from us?.


Yes, because, as I said, the conspiracy is worthless as proof or disproof of anything.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: phaseshifter on October 16, 2006, 08:37:47 AM
Quote
Yes, because, as I said, the conspiracy is worthless as proof or disproof of anything.


That is not accurate. The Flat earth theory is dependant upon the conspiracy concept. Because if there is no conspiracy, then we could just go to the ice wall to confirm it's existence and end the argument right there.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: GeoGuy on October 16, 2006, 08:59:10 AM
Quote from: "phaseshifter"
Quote
Yes, because, as I said, the conspiracy is worthless as proof or disproof of anything.


That is not accurate. The Flat earth theory is dependant upon the conspiracy concept. Because if there is no conspiracy, then we could just go to the ice wall to confirm it's existence and end the argument right there.


Ok, let's do this one more time. If Earth is flat there is a conspiracy. If Earth is not flat there is no conspiracy. The only way to determine whether or not there is a conspiracy would be to determine whether or not Earth is flat.

Let's look at this from the perspective of two triangles.
If the angles on two triangles are equal the triangles are similar (If Earth is flat there is a conspiracy). The only way to prove that the triangles are not similar is to disprove your original assumption, that the angles are equal (that Earth is flat).

So you see, we have to disprove our original assumption, that Earth is flat, in order to disprove the consequence of the assumption, that there is a conspiracy.
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: GeoGuy on October 16, 2006, 09:04:33 AM
Quote from: "Yardstick2006"

Sorry Captain Douchebag but that is exactly what you said.  Dont try and weasel out of what you said just because you got called out on the illogicality of it.


Yardstick, you know that's not what I said, as I've explained it already. Everyone understands this but you.
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Yardstick2006 on October 16, 2006, 09:08:02 AM
Quote from: "GeoGuy"


*sigh* No one knows what the world's governments would gain from a massive conspiracy covering up Earth's true shape. However, the fact remains that if Earth is flat there is a conspiracy. End of story.

And to answer your next question, yes, disproving the conspiracy would weaken the FE theory. However, this cannot be done because if Earth is flat there is a conspiracy.



Owned.[/b]
Title: Re: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: GeoGuy on October 16, 2006, 09:12:44 AM
Quote from: "Yardstick2006"

Owned.[/b]


Yes you were Ystick, yes you were.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: phaseshifter on October 16, 2006, 09:14:54 AM
Quote from: "GeoGuy"
Quote from: "phaseshifter"
Quote
Yes, because, as I said, the conspiracy is worthless as proof or disproof of anything.


That is not accurate. The Flat earth theory is dependant upon the conspiracy concept. Because if there is no conspiracy, then we could just go to the ice wall to confirm it's existence and end the argument right there.


Ok, let's do this one more time. If Earth is flat there is a conspiracy. If Earth is not flat there is no conspiracy. The only way to determine whether or not there is a conspiracy would be to determine whether or not Earth is flat.

Let's look at this from the perspective of two triangles.
If the angles on two triangles are equal the triangles are similar (If Earth is flat there is a conspiracy). The only way to prove that the triangles are not similar is to disprove your original assumption, that the angles are equal (that Earth is flat).

So you see, we have to disprove our original assumption, that Earth is flat, in order to disprove the consequence of the assumption, that there is a conspiracy.


Like I said, ALL WE HAVE TO DO TO DISPROVE IT (the FE theory) IS GO TO THE ICEWALL.

Now tell me, what would prevent someone from going?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: GeoGuy on October 16, 2006, 09:17:30 AM
Quote from: "phaseshifter"


Like I said, ALL WE HAVE TO DO TO DISPROVE IT (the FE theory) IS GO TO THE ICEWALL.


Then what's stopping you?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: phaseshifter on October 16, 2006, 09:24:21 AM
Quote from: "GeoGuy"
Quote from: "phaseshifter"


Like I said, ALL WE HAVE TO DO TO DISPROVE IT (the FE theory) IS GO TO THE ICEWALL.


Then what's stopping you?


That's what I'm asking you dammit What prevents anyone from going? Why hasn't ANYONE been there to tell us that it exists and the earth is flat?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: GeoGuy on October 16, 2006, 09:26:26 AM
Quote from: "phaseshifter"


That's what I'm asking you dammit What prevents anyone from going? Why hasn't ANYONE been there to tell us that it exists and the earth is flat?


No one has been there for the exact reasons you haven't been there.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: phaseshifter on October 16, 2006, 09:36:45 AM
Quote from: "GeoGuy"
Quote from: "phaseshifter"


That's what I'm asking you dammit What prevents anyone from going? Why hasn't ANYONE been there to tell us that it exists and the earth is flat?


No one has been there for the exact reasons you haven't been there.


I haven't been there because I'm not a scientist, and since I don't beleive the earth is flat, I had no reason to go look for evidence of something I didn't beleive in. However, some people do beleive in it, and some of them would have wanted to know, or to prove the world that they are right.


So in all those hundreds of years, people have explored every part of the planet EXCEPT specificly the ice wall?

I'm sure that you can see as well as I do that the FE theory needs the cospiracy in order to be valid. it isn't even necessary for someone to have gone there. All that is needed to prove or disprove the theory is for it to be possible to go to the ice wall. And it is only impossible in the FE theory BECAUSE of the conpiracy. Unles you can find another reason that would prevent someone who wants to go from going.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: GeoGuy on October 16, 2006, 09:48:53 AM
Quote from: "phaseshifter"

I haven't been there because I'm not a scientist, and since I don't beleive the earth is flat, I had no reason to go look for evidence of something I didn't beleive in.


FE's have not been there because they're not scientists, and since they don't believe the Earth is round they have no reason to go look for evidence of something they don't believe in.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Erasmus on October 16, 2006, 10:17:46 AM
How is this a question about logic?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Mythix Profit on October 16, 2006, 12:28:11 PM
Ah, Logic: that e'r present "fly in the ointment" in any good line of argument or load of bullshit.  
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ is a good database to critique and craft ones premises.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: phaseshifter on October 16, 2006, 06:07:05 PM
Quote from: "GeoGuy"
Quote from: "phaseshifter"

I haven't been there because I'm not a scientist, and since I don't beleive the earth is flat, I had no reason to go look for evidence of something I didn't beleive in.


FE's have not been there because they're not scientists, and since they don't believe the Earth is round they have no reason to go look for evidence of something they don't believe in.


Is it, or is it not possible to go to the ice wall?

Stop dodging the question.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: GeoGuy on October 16, 2006, 06:28:20 PM
Quote from: "phaseshifter"


Is it, or is it not possible to go to the ice wall?

Stop dodging the question.


I haven't dodged any question, it is not possible for most FE's to go to the ice wall for the exact same reason it is not possible for you to go to the ice wall. None of us, FE's or RE's, knows whether it's possible because we've never been there.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Unimportant on October 16, 2006, 07:14:36 PM
It is possible for anyone to go to the ice wall in the same way it is possible for anyone to rob Fort Knox, or possible for anyone to punch the pope in the stomach.

It's risky, you're likely to get shot, and for most people the reward does not warrant the liklihood of punishment.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: phaseshifter on October 16, 2006, 10:45:08 PM
Quote from: "GeoGuy"
Quote from: "phaseshifter"


Is it, or is it not possible to go to the ice wall?

Stop dodging the question.


I haven't dodged any question, it is not possible for most FE's to go to the ice wall for the exact same reason it is not possible for you to go to the ice wall. None of us, FE's or RE's, knows whether it's possible because we've never been there.


That doesn't matter. I have never been to kenya, but I know it's posible to go there. I've never been undersea but I know it's possible to go there.
Wha tmakes the ice wall so special.

Quote
It's risky, you're likely to get shot,


Why would I get shot?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: holybrain on October 17, 2006, 03:10:17 AM
Quote from: "phaseshifter"
Quote from: "Unimportant"
It's risky, you're likely to get shot,



Why would I get shot?


Because of the icewall guards.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Unimportant on October 17, 2006, 07:14:50 AM
Quote from: "holybrain"
Because of the icewall guards.

That's probably not explicit enough an explanation for phaseshifter. He's not too good at filling in the gaps, so I'll try to spell it out a little bit better.

You would get shot because an ice wall guard would depress the trigger of his projectile weapon while pointing it in your direction, causing the firing mechanism to ignite a charge, which propels a small projectile called a "bullet" with sufficient kinetic energy to reach your body and breach the skin, resuling in damage of internal organs and likely the eventual cessation of heart function, which will in turn cut the oxygen flow to the brain and ultimately result in death.
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: phaseshifter on October 20, 2006, 03:48:17 PM
Quote from: "Unimportant"
Quote from: "holybrain"
Because of the icewall guards.

That's probably not explicit enough an explanation for phaseshifter. He's not too good at filling in the gaps, so I'll try to spell it out a little bit better.

You would get shot because an ice wall guard would depress the trigger of his projectile weapon while pointing it in your direction, causing the firing mechanism to ignite a charge, which propels a small projectile called a "bullet" with sufficient kinetic energy to reach your body and breach the skin, resuling in damage of internal organs and likely the eventual cessation of heart function, which will in turn cut the oxygen flow to the brain and ultimately result in death.


You misunderstood. When  I asked "why would I get shot" I mean why would there be someone there to shoot me, and what reasons to you have to bleive that there would be someone there to shoot me?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Mythix Profit on October 20, 2006, 05:43:34 PM
Wow! you really do seem a bit challenged in your logic circuitrys' extrapolatory capacitence.

 "why would there be someone there to shoot me?"

because you are a designated target for any IceWall Guard whose field of fire you have entered. This is what these guys train for: someone will be there to cap yer ass.

 

"what reasons do you have to beleive that there would be someone there to shoot me?"

as you theoretically engaged in an approach to the ice wall; agents of the Conspiracy Conspiracy, having monitored your every move since you logged off and headed out, simply co-ordinated w/ the ICG to intercept you and affect your timely demise.

these Ops are conducted on an "as needed" basis of course..
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: phaseshifter on October 20, 2006, 07:55:36 PM
Quote
because you are a designated target for any IceWall Guard whose field of fire you have entered. This is what these guys train for: someone will be there to cap yer ass.


How do you know that?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: holybrain on October 20, 2006, 08:39:00 PM
Quote from: "phaseshifter"
Quote
because you are a designated target for any IceWall Guard whose field of fire you have entered. This is what these guys train for: someone will be there to cap yer ass.


How do you know that?


For once, phaseshifter sort of has a halfway decent point. How many expeditions go to Antarctica every year? Do we KNOW that there are ice wall guards?
Title: A Quick Question About Logic
Post by: Mythix Profit on October 21, 2006, 12:06:15 PM
OK, phaseshifter,

You really ought to contribute at least some of the higher-end thinking in this exchange.

A little logical strategic projection goes a long way.

According to Re sources: Antarctic Pop. is 1,000 non permanent incl. 200+ personnel rotating annually through the alleged South Polar Station. Supplied solely by air from NZ via McMurdo.

OK.

Given: the probability of unauthorized expeditions to FE Terra Australis by any Intrepid Explorer (ie Phaseshifter) looking for the IceWall and the logistical resources available to track and intercept said; A small highly mobile strike force is all that would reasonably be required and any/all IceWall Guard(s) on duty will be appropriately deployed to carry out their primary objective.  

If you can't follow an easy pattern out for more than a few initial permutations; I doubt that you are versed enough to ken, much less grok, much of what I post.

Although you must be awarded points for dogged persistance, If you continue to shirk your intellectual due diligence in this matter; I may not bother to respond further.