To a bacteria on a ping-pong ball

It lives on and endless, flat field of white plastic, that in no way looks round.

This topic fails, and is now about Tom Bishop's forum avatar.

and to a bacteria on a ping pong table, it also in no way looks round.

FE'ers will argue that you've never been on a ping-pong ball so you'll never know for sure.

The real reason for this reply though if about your sig. It follows a more logical argument than the FE'ers. Good job.

and to a bacteria on a ping pong table, it also in no way looks round.

Exactly. And it most certainly IS round, despite it's appearance.

R1) All galactic bodies we can see in space are spheres.
R2) We have never seen a galactic body in space that was not a sphere.
R3) The Earth is a galactic body.
C1) Therefore, from inductive logic, the Earth is a sphere.

1) All galactic bodies we can see in space appear not to have life on them
2) We have never observed a galactic body to have life.
3) The Earth is a galactic body
4) Therefore, from inductive logic, the Earth musn't have life on it.

1) All galactic bodies we can see in space appear not to have life on them
2) We have never observed a galactic body to have life.
3) The Earth is a galactic body
4) Therefore, from inductive logic, the Earth musn't have life on it.

Reason 2 is false.

Quote from: "Rick_James"

and to a bacteria on a ping pong table, it also in no way looks round.

Exactly. And it most certainly IS round, despite it's appearance.

Really? Where can I purchase a round ping pong table?

Quote from: "Meatballsoup"

Quote from: "Rick_James"

and to a bacteria on a ping pong table, it also in no way looks round.

Exactly. And it most certainly IS round, despite it's appearance.

Really? Where can I purchase a round ping pong table?

Ah, I thought you said ball.

You're still missing my point, though.
With such a size different between the observer and the observed, and the fact that the observer views the observed while on it, you can have no prediction of what shape the object you are on is based on what you see.

The fact that a round earth would appear flat is the very counter example to why saying the earth is flat because appears so is invalid logic.

Ah, I thought you said ball.

You're still missing my point, though.
With such a size different between the observer and the observed, and the fact that the observer views the observed while on it, you can have no prediction of what shape the object you are on is based on what you see.

Luckily, that's the easiest way to observe the flatness of the earth, not the only way.

Quote from: "Meatballsoup"

Ah, I thought you said ball.

You're still missing my point, though.
With such a size different between the observer and the observed, and the fact that the observer views the observed while on it, you can have no prediction of what shape the object you are on is based on what you see.

Luckily, that's the easiest way to observe the flatness of the earth, not the only way.

Well, it turns out your easiest way holds no ground whatsoever, as I just gave a counter example.

Quote from: "Rick_James"

1) All galactic bodies we can see in space appear not to have life on them
2) We have never observed a galactic body to have life.
3) The Earth is a galactic body
4) Therefore, from inductive logic, the Earth musn't have life on it.

Reason 2 is false.

Give your source for this claim please.  I think you're making it up.

Regarding your signature:



This is a picture of an asteroid that appeared in New Scientist in November 2005.  As you can see, it is a galactic body and it is not a sphere.  You can, of course, claim that the picture is a fake.  However that would be admitting that all the evidence of photos of the Earth etc. are equally not permissible.  While we take that position, typically REers believe those photos to be real.  Either your signature is wrong, and there are galactic bodies that have been observed that are not spherical, or you will have to accept that photo evidence really isn't permissible.  Which is it?

and to a bacteria on a ping pong table, it also in no way looks round.

I think that's his point. To you FE'ers earth does not look round

Quote from: "Meatballsoup"

Quote from: "Rick_James"

1) All galactic bodies we can see in space appear not to have life on them
2) We have never observed a galactic body to have life.
3) The Earth is a galactic body
4) Therefore, from inductive logic, the Earth musn't have life on it.

Reason 2 is false.

Give your source for this claim please.  I think you're making it up.

Regarding your signature:



This is a picture of an asteroid that appeared in New Scientist in November 2005.  As you can see, it is a galactic body and it is not a sphere.  You can, of course, claim that the picture is a fake.  However that would be admitting that all the evidence of photos of the Earth etc. are equally not permissible.  While we take that position, typically REers believe those photos to be real.  Either your signature is wrong, and there are galactic bodies that have been observed that are not spherical, or you will have to accept that photo evidence really isn't permissible.  Which is it?

I don't argue that picture. It is indeed in no way flat. Replace "sphere" with "round" if it bothers you so, however an asteroid is just spec of lost dust compared to planets and stars, which are always spheres.

R1) All galactic bodies we can see in space are spheres.

We have seen galaxies that are not spheres.

R2) We have never seen a galactic body in space that was not a sphere.

See above.

Quote

R1) All galactic bodies we can see in space are spheres.

We have seen galaxies that are not spheres.

Quote

R2) We have never seen a galactic body in space that was not a sphere.

See above.

galaxies are not bodies. Galatics bodies IE bodies from other galaxies.

Galactic bodies are galaxies.

beast: Spheroid would apply best. It doesn't make it perfectly round, but it's not flat either. In RE, the earth is slightly flattened at the poles. Thus making it not "perfecty" round (like the asteroid), but still round enough to be called a  spheroid.

That was only a clarification, if you have anything better, I will accept it.

The asteroid is not round because it's too small to be a ball. Throw enough asteroids together and their self-attraction will crush themselves into a spheroid.

Spiral galaxies are not round because they're not solid bodies. It's weird, they're sort of in self-orbit around each other (since every star and dust speck and dark matter cloud in the galaxy has mass).

And both of the 1,2,3,4 arguments are not necessarily valid.

Quote

R1) All galactic bodies we can see in space are spheres.

We have seen galaxies that are not spheres.

I haven't. But have you seen this thread lately: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9338? Just curious why you haven't answered my question...