1

Flat Earth Q&A / En_Aristeuein

« on: December 02, 2006, 03:51:53 PM »

Aww mommy can't we keep it I'll feed it and everything all by myself

2

Flat Earth Q&A / rebuttle to "its a conspiracy"

« on: December 01, 2006, 10:35:23 AM »

Also, NASA has only existed for a little more than half a century, a relatively insignificant period of time.

What does this have to do with anything?

3

Flat Earth Q&A / En_Aristeuein

« on: November 30, 2006, 07:32:01 PM »

That doesn't make any sense, Spotteddick.

"The burden of proof is never on the challenger of an unaccepted theory?"

The hell is that supposed to mean? With that logic, an unaccepted theory could never be logically accepted, since if you refute evidence with that logic, the 'accepted theory' gets the benefit of any doubt ever...That's just nonsensical.

~D-Draw

Obviously the unaccepted theory would eventually be accepted if it was sound with proper application of the scientific method.

4

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I don't now who is more pathetic....

« on: November 30, 2006, 07:27:49 PM »

Or is it the REs who would waste their time trying to convince these fools of their mistake? (You can't argue with a fool.)

I think it's great fun actually.  It's get a lot more interesting/funny folks than a handful of other forums I could mention.

5

Flat Earth Q&A / En_Aristeuein

« on: November 30, 2006, 07:20:13 PM »

No, the burden of proof is on the FE's to provide their evidence for a FE, and attempt to persuade you to accept their theory. You, having rejected said theory, have now placed the burden of proof on yourself to provide evidence that counters our evidence.

What? There is never any Burden of Proof on the challenger of an unaccepted theory.  My point was the issue is not between you and me, or any other RE here vs. any other FE here.   I am a secondary character here; commonly accepted scientific knowledge agrees that the Earth is round.  

The concept of Burden of Proof in relation to scientific understanding is ALWAYS placed on the initial challenger of commonly accepted theory, never on the challenger of the proposed theory.  That is the nature of the scientific method, and there's plenty of documentation that states exactly this.

6

The Lounge / Re: Funnies Websites Online

« on: November 30, 2006, 03:44:10 PM »

My fav is www.pbfcomics.com (been following it for some years).
Post your own.

SERGEANT GRUMBLLLLLLLLLLLES!

7

Flat Earth Q&A / En_Aristeuein

« on: November 30, 2006, 03:36:03 PM »

hey geoguy. what is your evidence that nasa is in on the conspiracy?

They keep lying and saying Earth is round. They also release lots of fake satellite pictures.

Only if you want to change the scale of the argument.  I posit, quite correctly, that the flat Earth theory is a challenge to the scientifically accepted round Earth model.  The burden of proof then, in all aspects, is on a flat-Earther to disprove the round-Earth model.  

Burden of proof would be on me, if I were making a challenge to your claims, however, flat-Earthers relegate the most valuable evidence of a round Earth into the "fake" or "conspiracy" folder, then moving to say, since you cannot prove us wrong, we are correct.  

That is a logical fallacy, in appealing to lack of proof of the negative is not valid deduction by the scientific method.

8

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: No offense intended

« on: November 30, 2006, 07:19:22 AM »

If space is exerting equal pressure from all angles, how can a planet maintain a disc shape?

lol, that's so funny.  REers come across as trying to be so smart and then they say stuff like that.  :lol:

Jesus Christ fractalhelix, seriously, please explain this mysterious force from space that enacts itself upon the Earth

9

The Lounge / Concerning Santa Claus

« on: November 29, 2006, 07:29:36 PM »

There's also a chance that I'm in fact the raincloud that's hovering above your house, and I'm about to crap a rainbow on you.

I was wondering who that was up there.

Yeah, is that rainbow coming yet or what? Shit or get off the pot, man!

10

Flat Earth Q&A / En_Aristeuein

« on: November 29, 2006, 06:05:04 PM »

Well, the burden of proof is upon those that believe in a flat Earth, for all allegations.

Both false and irrelevant.

Wrong.

Your "wrong" is wrong. One might have said the burden of proof was on the FE's, but since we've presented our evidence, and you've denied it, the burden of proof is now on you.

Only if you want to change the scale of the argument.  I posit, quite correctly, that the flat Earth theory is a challenge to the scientifically accepted round Earth model.  The burden of proof then, in all aspects, is on a flat-Earther to disprove the round-Earth model.  

Burden of proof would be on me, if I were making a challenge to your claims, however, flat-Earthers relegate the most valuable evidence of a round Earth into the "fake" or "conspiracy" folder, then moving to say, since you cannot prove us wrong, we are correct.  

That is a logical fallacy, in appealing to lack of proof of the negative is not valid deduction by the scientific method.

11

Flat Earth Q&A / En_Aristeuein

« on: November 29, 2006, 05:50:15 PM »

Well, the burden of proof is upon those that believe in a flat Earth, for all allegations.

Both false and irrelevant.

Wrong.

12

Flat Earth Q&A / En_Aristeuein

« on: November 29, 2006, 05:33:32 PM »

Do you really think that making your idiotic demands in capital letters will make people any more likely to satisfy you?

 Well, the burden of proof is upon those that believe in a flat Earth, for all allegations.

13

Flat Earth Q&A / Proof!....

« on: November 28, 2006, 07:41:06 PM »

The same could be said for believing/trolling the internet claiming to believe in a flat Earth

I wasn't aware there was an issue with people believing/trolling the internet claiming to be FE's, thanks for the heads up.

You can count on me bro

14

Flat Earth Q&A / Proof!....

« on: November 28, 2006, 07:36:48 PM »

Once again, this idea was funny about five-hundred tries ago, now it's just lame. I thought you'd have been here long enough to know that, Rossk.

The same could be said for believing/trolling the internet claiming to believe in a flat Earth

15

Flat Earth Q&A / Proof!....

« on: November 28, 2006, 07:04:36 PM »

Rossk #5 how can this not be common knowledge? Who is keeping this information from the classrooms?  Why are we being lied to?!

16

Flat Earth Q&A / Proof!....

« on: November 28, 2006, 06:52:39 PM »

I agree... I mean it's so obvious, isn't it?

17

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Please explain the horizon

« on: November 28, 2006, 05:29:33 PM »

Essentially, I am saying this: Flat Earth Hypothesis can only be believed by throwing away easily observed facts which contradict it.

Throwing away some and relegating others to the "conspiracy" pile.