Tom Bishop vs. FE Canon

You keep calling him "Dr" yet Dogplatter says Rowbotham didn't hold a doctorate in any field.  Please enlighten me as to why you refer to him as "Dr".

Rowbotham held a medical degree. Read "Flat Earth: The History of an infamous idea" for a biography. I would reprint the material here in full, but that would be an insult to Ms. Christine Garwood.

The Flat Earth Society does not endorse anything said by Tom Bishop.  In fact, just about everything he says is stupid.

Care to contradict me on any of my claims? Everything I've said has been endorsed by Dr. Rowbotham himself. He's the founder of the Flat Earth Society, if you haden't noticed.

Once again, too bad this isn't his website.

Quote

The Flat Earth Society does not endorse anything said by Tom Bishop.  In fact, just about everything he says is stupid.

Care to contradict me on any of my claims? Everything I've said has been endorsed by Dr. Rowbotham himself. He's the founder of the Flat Earth Society, if you haden't noticed.

This post is just too ironic. 

It's in my sig. Engy Baby won QOTW.

Once again, too bad this isn't his website.

Then why does your FAQ instruct the reader to read Earth Not a Globe?

Because, Daniel, founder of this site, felt the need to use it to clarify some frequently asked questions.  Rowbotham died long before the internet was invented.

Because, Daniel, founder of this site, felt the need to use it to clarify some frequently asked questions.  Rowbotham died long before the internet was invented.

Yes, who would have guessed that Robotham died before the internet was invented. Thanks for the striking revelation, gumshoe.

Since Daniel decided to clarify some of the Frequently Asked Questions by pointing at Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham, then it is obvious to everyone on this forum that this is Rowbotham's website.

Unless you are able to provide explanations better than Dr. Rowbotham, Flat Earth Theory will never be yours to take.

Since Daniel decided to clarify some of the Frequently Asked Questions by pointing at Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham, then it is obvious to everyone on this forum that this is Rowbotham's website.

 

Daniel also decided to use some of my ideas to clarify some FAQs, so does that make this website mine?

Gumshoe?

Daniel also decided to use some of my ideas to clarify some FAQs, so does that make this website mine?

Yes its your website

What the hell is gumshoe?

It's obviously an imposter who doesn't know that Tom always says dumbshoe.

What the hell is gumshoe?

A detective.

Quote from: Gayer loves Haton on June 04, 2007, 12:15:30 PM

What the hell is gumshoe?

A detective.

Oh right. Tom is being odd today. Well odder..

Daniel also decided to use some of my ideas to clarify some FAQs, so does that make this website mine?

Have you provided mathematical evidence for the height of the sun or observational references for what exists beyond the Ice Wall? If not, then you are under no presumption to contradict Rowbotham. He triangulates the sun to 700 miles above the sea level of the earth using tired and true astronomical calculations. Rowbotham tells us what is beyond the ice wall by simply stating that it is unknown how far the ice extends.

The half thought out model described in your FAQ is just messy and insufficient. Everyone can agree on that. The Flat Earth Theory will always be considered "Rowbotham's theory" just as evolution will always be considered "Darwin's theory."

Rowbotham tells us what is beyond the ice wall by simpley stating that it is unknown how far the ice extends.

Quoted for irony.

Yeah, I'm having trouble figuring out how that is "observational evidence"... 

He triangulates the sun to 700 miles above the sea level of the earth using tired and true astronomical calculations.

Those poor tired astronomical calculations, someone should give them a few days off for rest.

Just as I expected. Instead of providing content to your posts you children will just wander off into yourselves, thinking you "one upped" the other person in a debate. The truth is that Daniel links Earth Not a Globe in the FAQ for the reader as a reference. Therefore Daniel considers the book Earth Not a Globe as valid.

Not only are you contradicting Dr. Rowbotham, but you are contradicting the site admin Daniel as well. If you choose to personally deny Earth Not a Globe, feel free. But under no pretense is it not part of "Flat Earth Theory." That's probably the most ignorant contradiction I've ever heard.

I'm gonna ask Daniel himself.

Quote

Daniel also decided to use some of my ideas to clarify some FAQs, so does that make this website mine?

...[Rowbotham] triangulates the sun to 700 miles above the sea level of the earth using tired and true astronomical calculations. Rowbotham tells us what is beyond the ice wall by simply stating that it is unknown how far the ice extends.

TomB lies here folks. Rowbotham's method of triangulations is unfounded. He did not consider error. He might as well have pulled the number out of thin air. His calculations did not consider the difference in altitude between the two observers. He does not tell us how the angles were measured or  to what degree of accuracy. The difference between the two observers (64-61) is only three degrees. If the margin were only plus or minus 1.5 degrees then the results are not different, and the Sun could be at any distance. (I suggest that TomB try to measure the angle to the bottom edge of the midday Sun and tell us how accurate he can be.)

Please reject this experiment as fundamentally flawed. Let's use the community telescope to get an accurate reading!

Please reference Chapter V.

Quote

Daniel also decided to use some of my ideas to clarify some FAQs, so does that make this website mine?

Have you provided mathematical evidence for the height of the sun or observational references for what exists beyond the Ice Wall? If not, then you are under no presumption to contradict Rowbotham. He triangulates the sun to 700 miles above the sea level of the earth using tired and true astronomical calculations. Rowbotham tells us what is beyond the ice wall by simply stating that it is unknown how far the ice extends.

If we are merely trying to "one-up" you, please explain this apparent contradiction (highlighted in bold) in what you stated.

Just as I expected. Instead of providing content to your posts you children will just wander off into yourselves, thinking you "one upped" the other person in a debate. The truth is that Daniel links Earth Not a Globe in the FAQ for the reader as a reference. Therefore Daniel considers the book Earth Not a Globe as valid.

Not only are you contradicting Dr. Rowbotham, but you are contradicting the site admin Daniel as well. If you choose to personally deny Earth Not a Globe, feel free. But under no pretense is it not part of "Flat Earth Theory." That's probably the most ignorant contradiction I've ever heard.

TomB, in western civilization, the only text that we're not allowed to disagree with, to improve upon, or to dismiss portions of, is the Bible, and then only if you accept the dogma. Darwin's On the Origin of Species gave evolution a boost, but no one is afraid to reject its errors or to improve upon its inferences. I suggest that you stop insisting that every one answer of their master's whistle and start thinking for yourself.

Darwin's On the Origin of Species gave evolution a boost, but no one is afraid to reject its errors or to improve upon its inferences.

The difference is, TheEngineer doesn't improve on Rowbotham's model at all. He simply states that it is no longer valid without giving alternatives or a reason for why it is no longer valid to FET. I will suggest that he crawl back into his hole until he has something constructive or meaningful to say.

If we are merely trying to "one-up" you, please explain this apparent contradiction (highlighted in bold) in what you stated.

Rowbotam is unclear what exists beyond the edge of the Ice Wall. His assumption is that is stretches on perpetually. From the edge of the Ice Wall, for as far as the eye and telescope can see, the tundra of ice and snow stretches seemingly forever.

TheEngineer, however, changes Flat Earth Theory by unjustifiably stating in the FAQ that there is an edge just beyond the Ice Wall.

If TheEngineer thinks that he can provide a more comprehensive model than Rowbotham, then why doesn't he ever show us this model? Why does he continue to link to Rowbotham? It really is unnecessary for him to come in here with his twaddle claiming that Earth Not a Globe is no longer valid. It's ignorant of him to think that there is an edge to the earth without telling us how the atmosphere stays upon the earth's surface.

It's a simple tactic he uses to avoid having to answer certain questions about Flat Earth Theory, nothing more. Engineer avoids questions by stating "that's not my model, that's Tom's/Robotham's model!" He will then ignore a topic and repeat the same thing next week verbatim. It really is transparent of him.

Rowbotam is unclear what exists beyond the edge of the Ice Wall. His assumption is that is stretches on perpetually. From the edge of the Ice Wall, for as far as the eye and telescope can see, the tundra of ice and snow stretches seemingly forever.

So you lied, and what he said about the ice wall wasn't based on observation at all.

Let's not make this about TheEngineer.  This is about Rowbotham.  If he was just assuming that there is no end to the icy tundra that lies beyond the ice wall, how is his assertion more reputable than TheEngineer's? 

how is his assertion more reputable than TheEngineer's?

For the last one hundred and fifty years Flat Earth proponents have always assumed an infinite earth.  That's how the atmosphere stays on in Earth Not a Globe. That's how the atmosphere stays on in the book "Zetetic Cosmology," in the book "The Flat Earth and her moulder," in the book "The Terrestrial Plane," in the book "Terra Firma," in the book "The Persistently Flat Earth," and in the book "The Earth: A Plane."

If TheEngineer would like to add a hypothetical edge just beyond the Ice Wall, I have no objection to it. He will just need to tell us how the atmosphere stays upon the surface of the earth in this new hypothetical model. He should also reference some observational evidence if this new edge is to be located just beyond the Ice Wall. Afterwards we can debate its validity and veracity.

Boy, it's starting to sound like the tenets of FET are based on a foundation of unproven dogma! 

Boy, it's starting to sound like the tenets of FET are based on a foundation of unproven dogma!

Each of the Flat Earth authors, and most FE proponents, have conducted experiments proving the earth a plane. The only remaining question is the structure and makeup of this new universe. If you continue to doubt the original work of Samuel Birley Rowbotham, you are free to reproduce his experiments for yourself.

Quote

Boy, it's starting to sound like the tenets of FET are based on a foundation of unproven dogma!

Each of the Flat Earth authors have conducted experiments proving the earth a plane. The only remaining question is the structure and makeup of this new universe. If you continue to doubt the original work of Samuel Birley Rowbotham, you are free to reproduce his experiments yourself. I have.

TomB, we've already caught you in that lie. You have not done all of his experiments by your own admission.

He edited too late