Round Earthers have the burden of proof.

Hey guys, just so you are clear:

1. Francoise doesn't represent the concensous of FET. So there's no point in trying to put in any rebuttles, you'll only receive ill comments and immaturity.
2. Francoise is a troll. Trolls come in two flavors: Trolls like me, and bad trolls. Francoise is a bad troll (really horrible at being a bad troll to boot, but a bad troll non the less).
3. He obviously has not seen a certain site and video.
4. You're battling a retard. And falling for it.

Now that's awfully convincing evidence. An infinite earth cannot rotate (or move at all, for that matter), ergo that experiment proves the earth's rotation. And by extension, disproves everything frankis says.

Now that's awfully convincing evidence. An infinite earth cannot rotate (or move at all, for that matter), ergo that experiment proves the earth's rotation. And by extension, disproves everything frankis says.

The experiment was actually to prove that gravity exists.

You have the burden of proof, not me.

how so? From what I understand, the burden of proof lies with the person who is claiming something that is contrary to the common belief. You, sir, are claiming that not only is the earth flat, but there are other planes beyond the 'ice wall', thus contradicting both flat earth and round earth theories. Therefore, you have the burden of proof, not us. I have not seen one shred of evidence for your arguments. You haven't even bothered to copy and paste the beloved 'FAQ'.

Did you not see my most recent post in this thread?

Hey guys, just so you are clear:

1. Francoise doesn't represent the concensous of FET. So there's no point in trying to put in any rebuttles, you'll only receive ill comments and immaturity.
2. Francoise is a troll. Trolls come in two flavors: Trolls like me, and bad trolls. Francoise is a bad troll (really horrible at being a bad troll to boot, but a bad troll non the less).
3. He obviously has not seen a certain site and video.
4. You're battling a retard. And falling for it.

I dunno. Franc seems to make a lot of sense to me, really.

Quote from: WTF on March 27, 2007, 07:12:33 PM

It's hard to consider the mainstream position "trolling" so it's unlikely I'm projecting.  Maybe I'm wrong - you could always be a post-count whore, too.

On this board, the mainstream position is the Flat Earth. Or did you not notice... um... THE NAME OF THIS BOARD?!?!

lol. Lashing out randomly huh? The name of this board is not important considering it is a biased sample of the population. Nearly all people are capable of supporting one side or the other. In order to get an unbiased group for determining who has the burden of proof is to include the whole world. Coming as close as we can to that end, the FE still carry the burden. Anyways, even if we decided to include the site, there are more RE supporters on these forums than FE supporters.

By the way, we were invited to debate this issue. I am only accepting the invitation.

Quote from: Franc T., Planar on March 27, 2007, 07:05:36 PM

You have the burden of proof, not me.

how so? From what I understand, the burden of proof lies with the person who is claiming something that is contrary to the common belief. You, sir, are claiming that not only is the earth flat, but there are other planes beyond the 'ice wall', thus contradicting both flat earth and round earth theories. Therefore, you have the burden of proof, not us. I have not seen one shred of evidence for your arguments. You haven't even bothered to copy and paste the beloved 'FAQ'.

This argument is in fact correctly established on a solid foundation. Good work! 

RamenBrother, a marvelous post. LOTS of arguments. FE'rs don't have arguments, and i think that they are the core of a teory. If you just talk about conspiracy and avoid all good-argumented posts, you will never get accepted.

Therefore, i challenge Fe'rs to counter RamenBrother's post.

I agree. I want a response to that wonderful piece of brilliance.

Francy... now your proof, I showed my proof. Where is yours? If the Earth is truely flat you should be able to come up with some proof. If you want more proof I can supply it... only if you provide at least one shred of proof.

The burden of proof applies to anyone who makes a proposition about reality.

Both Flat Earthers and Round Earthers make propositions about reality.

Occam's Razor states that when two models propose to explain the same facts, the model with the most processes or entities is the one we should adopt, until further evidence comes in.

FE and RE propose to explain the same facts, but RE has the added problem of explaining how the Earth got to be the size it is, and how it got flatteny-round. The size, shape and formation of the Earth are all arbitrary factors, which do not jibe with a natural formation.

Therefore, for Round Earthism to be true, Occam's Razor must be false, as well. Therefore Round Earthers have the burden of proof to show that.

Wouldn't Occam's Razor also suggest that all the governments in the world are not involved in a conspiracy, though?  If you accept that as a fact, then don't you have to explain why every nation in the world, many of whom hate each other and have conflicting philosophies, would work together to make everybody believe that the earth is round?  And also what their motivation is?

Based on your own argument about Occam's Razor, isn't it more reasonable to think that all the nations in the world just see the simple facts of science, unburdened by the suggestions of a work of fantasy written thousands of years ago, and this is why the say the earth is round?  Because it's actually true?

You invoked Occam's Razor.  Please explain what motivates the world's many governments to all work together to make people believe the world is round, and why they are working together in the first place.

#1 Talking to Franc T., Planar

Don't do it. Franc changes how he sees the world more often than (normal) people change their underwear.  He always contradicts himself and never presents evidence of his claims.  Whenever someone has a point about something he just says something along the lines of "Get out of here troll" or "Stop listening to your 'round earthism' religion and use your eyes"

#2 Asking what motivates the conspiracy

FE'ers always seem to say that the conspiracy is motivated by money...Somehow keeping this under wraps and bribing people brings a profit to them...I don't know really it just sounds like more BS spewed at a good point.

Anyway those are 2 of the things I learned not to do here because they'll only result in either Franc's insanity or some half-assed idea.

And for your question about Occam's Razor Franc'll say what he said before...

You have the burden of proof, not me.

Quote from: Franc T., Planar on March 25, 2007, 05:42:17 PM

The burden of proof applies to anyone who makes a proposition about reality.

Both Flat Earthers and Round Earthers make propositions about reality.

Occam's Razor states that when two models propose to explain the same facts, the model with the most processes or entities is the one we should adopt, until further evidence comes in.

FE and RE propose to explain the same facts, but RE has the added problem of explaining how the Earth got to be the size it is, and how it got flatteny-round. The size, shape and formation of the Earth are all arbitrary factors, which do not jibe with a natural formation.

Therefore, for Round Earthism to be true, Occam's Razor must be false, as well. Therefore Round Earthers have the burden of proof to show that.

Wouldn't Occam's Razor also suggest that all the governments in the world are not involved in a conspiracy, though?  If you accept that as a fact, then don't you have to explain why every nation in the world, many of whom hate each other and have conflicting philosophies, would work together to make everybody believe that the earth is round?  And also what their motivation is?

Based on your own argument about Occam's Razor, isn't it more reasonable to think that all the nations in the world just see the simple facts of science, unburdened by the suggestions of a work of fantasy written thousands of years ago, and this is why the say the earth is round?  Because it's actually true?

You invoked Occam's Razor.  Please explain what motivates the world's many governments to all work together to make people believe the world is round, and why they are working together in the first place.

Franc doesn't understand the concept of Occam's Razor, or many other concepts for that matter. He doesn't even agree with most of the other FE'ers on here.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The claim that goes against thousands of years of observation and science of a RE requires evidence that can prove all of the things discussed in this thread. The most impossible claim to prove is the conspiracy aspect with all of the incredible images, let alone the various missions that are undertaken every year. If there really was a FE conspiracy, it would be so much easier not to reveal such details of every space mission. It would be much easier to have failed launches, and more general experiments, never coming to such specific conclusions about the findings. Things like Voyager, Hubble, the Spacedust project wouldn't exist as about 100 other projects. If all of it was fake, there would have been no reason to have the mistake in the mirror that Hubble initially had requiring a lens to fix it for example. They would have just continued to fake the pictures as they always have.

I love the assertion that REers have to explain  "how the Earth got to be the size it is, and how it got flatteny round".   My guess is he was raised in a Christian Science household (or something) and has never even opened a science textbook, where such explanations can be found quite easily.

For FEers:  How do you explain the fact that wherever we look, we see a curved horizon?  The fact is, if the earth was flat, we would be able to look in any direction that's not blocked by some kind of obstruction and see forever.  There would be no horizon.  But there is.  Which is the first proof that we had (thousands of years ago, when it was first stated) that the Earth is round.  The only rational explanation for a horizon is a curved surface.

But FEers like to ignore facts in favor of outlandish fantasy, don't they?  They are the flesh-and-blood embodiment of Stephen Colbert's "truthiness".

If somebody had told me yesterday that there were still people who believed that the earth was flat, I would have said "No fucking way.  I don't believe that.  Nobody's that stupid."  Now there's a whole group of them on the internet?

Well, here's my arguement: Proof isn't a burden. It's a priviledge!

Quote from: Franc T., Planar on March 27, 2007, 07:18:56 PM

Quote from: WTF on March 27, 2007, 07:12:33 PM

It's hard to consider the mainstream position "trolling" so it's unlikely I'm projecting.  Maybe I'm wrong - you could always be a post-count whore, too.

On this board, the mainstream position is the Flat Earth. Or did you not notice... um... THE NAME OF THIS BOARD?!?!

lol. Lashing out randomly huh? The name of this board is not important considering it is a biased sample of the population. Nearly all people are capable of supporting one side or the other. In order to get an unbiased group for determining who has the burden of proof is to include the whole world. Coming as close as we can to that end, the FE still carry the burden. Anyways, even if we decided to include the site, there are more RE supporters on these forums than FE supporters.

By the way, we were invited to debate this issue. I am only accepting the invitation.

Still waiting Franc... 

By the way, this thread is completely pointless.

Essentially by definition: whenever someone proposes a theory that challenges the norm, the "burden of proof" is upon them to prove their theory rather than for those in the norm to disprove it.

So, since a vast majority of the world believes that the Earth is round, and this whole resurfacing in FE belief challenges that, the burden of proof (regardless of how much evidence supports either side) lies with the FE'ers until they convince a majority of the world that the Earth is flat. Simply: since a round Earth is the currently accepted model, it is up to you flat Earthers to prove your theory - not up to round Earthers to disprove it (since our model is currently accepted as fact).

You can say that more evidence lies with FEism but to say that REers have the burden of proof is to redefine the term.

I was under the impression that Occam's Razor said that "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one."   meaning the solution which makes the fewest assumptions.   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor

And because people hate Wiki for some reason:
Occam's razor (also spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or "shaving off", those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory.
http://www.reference.com/search?q=occam's%20razor

I was under the impression that Occam's Razor said that "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one."   meaning the solution which makes the fewest assumptions.   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor

And because people hate Wiki for some reason:
Occam's razor (also spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or "shaving off", those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory.
http://www.reference.com/search?q=occam's%20razor

That is why I posted a bunch of the assumptions that an FE'er has to make
here http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11937.msg165657#msg165657
Everything they come up with is a contrivance that is much more easily explained by the simpler model of a spherical earth (not to mention we have the ultimate proof now, observation from space).

RE'ers do not have the burden of proof.  The FE theory is endorsed by the Bible.  End of debate.

RE'ers do not have the burden of proof.  The FE theory is endorsed by the Bible.  End of debate.

The Bible also said a virgin had a baby...

A virgin DID have a baby!  It was immaculate conception!  Why doesn't everyone understand that everything in the Bible is true!  It says so itself!

A virgin DID have a baby!  It was immaculate conception!  Why doesn't everyone understand that everything in the Bible is true!  It says so itself!

You're retarded.  Being I say that is true, it makes it true;  through your reasoning at least.

I don't really care about some rule of who has the burden of proof.  For all I care, both sides have to provide proof.  For the Round Earth, lots of evidence:  The change of perspective as the viewer's altitude rises, the shadow of the earth in lunar eclipses, the timing and effect of tides, the angular effects of views of the stars as we travel north or south, measurements that work only on a sphere, views from space vehicles, etc. etc.  On the side of the Flat Earth, not so much:  Accusing all scientists of taking bribes, accusing all governments of being part of some vast ancient conspiracy, etc.

The Flat Earth side cannot even provide a reliable map on flat paper of what is supposedly an equally flat earth. 
To me, the debate is decisively over.