So I brought this up in school today...

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.

Quote from: "Perpetualy Dreaming"

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.

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.

Quote from: "bads3ctor"

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.

Quote from: "Perpetualy Dreaming"

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.