"Conspiracy" is not a valid argument

  • 320 Replies
  • 41276 Views
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #30 on: June 10, 2008, 11:23:33 AM »
Your hypothetical doesn't apply to reality because you have no direct evidence of a "flat earth."

It's a hypothetical, not an analogy.

Again, how would you explain all the contradicting "evidence" if you knew for certain that the earth was flat?
In your hypothetical, contradicting evidence would not exist.  I would not be able to predict sightings of spacecraft based on their orbital velocity and location.  If FE is true, I should not be able to observe these things, yet I do, so FE is not true.  It's a simple null hypothesis.

Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #31 on: June 10, 2008, 11:25:28 AM »
Then you have a conspiracy to prove.  Don't bother though, I've personally witnessed NASA spacecraft in orbit, so there is no lie.

Right, and by proving a flat earth the conspiracy is also proved because if the earth is flat then NASA has to be lying.

I would have to be lying too.  I know I am not lying so I know that FE is not true.

*

Sean O'Grady

  • 625
  • Flat Earth Theorist
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #32 on: June 10, 2008, 11:27:18 AM »
In your hypothetical, contradicting evidence would not exist.

In my hypothetical contradicting evidence does exist. Could you explain it without a conspiracy?

Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #33 on: June 10, 2008, 11:30:47 AM »
In your hypothetical, contradicting evidence would not exist.

In my hypothetical contradicting evidence does exist. Could you explain it without a conspiracy?
If contradicting evidence exists your hypothetical is not possible.  In an FE world, it should not be possible to predict and observe the appearance of orbiting satellites and spacecraft only based on raw orbital information.  If we observe satellites in orbit then we know we can refute the FE hypothesis.  You don't seem capable of grasping the concept of a null hypothesis.

Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #34 on: June 10, 2008, 11:44:55 AM »
In your hypothetical, contradicting evidence would not exist.

In my hypothetical contradicting evidence does exist. Could you explain it without a conspiracy?
If contradicting evidence exists your hypothetical is not possible.  In an FE world, it should not be possible to predict and observe the appearance of orbiting satellites and spacecraft only based on raw orbital information.  If we observe satellites in orbit then we know we can refute the FE hypothesis.  You don't seem capable of grasping the concept of a null hypothesis.

You are an idiot.  A very stubborn idiot.

*

lindelof

  • 422
  • DADA IS NOT DEAD. WATCH YOUR OVERCOAT.
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #35 on: June 10, 2008, 12:06:53 PM »
If contradicting evidence exists your hypothetical is not possible.  In an FE world, it should not be possible to predict and observe the appearance of orbiting satellites and spacecraft only based on raw orbital information.  If we observe satellites in orbit then we know we can refute the FE hypothesis.  You don't seem capable of grasping the concept of a null hypothesis.

That's excellent evidence for RE.  Don't think I've seen it before Messier.  Trekky or someone could have brought it up ages ago, though.

See lived, the way that science works is that you have a theory and you deduce a prediction from that theory and than you test that prediction.  If the observation matches your prediction, than you have evidence for your theory.  That's all that Messier is doing.

Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #36 on: June 10, 2008, 12:11:40 PM »
In your hypothetical, contradicting evidence would not exist.

In my hypothetical contradicting evidence does exist. Could you explain it without a conspiracy?
If contradicting evidence exists your hypothetical is not possible.  In an FE world, it should not be possible to predict and observe the appearance of orbiting satellites and spacecraft only based on raw orbital information.  If we observe satellites in orbit then we know we can refute the FE hypothesis.  You don't seem capable of grasping the concept of a null hypothesis.

You are an idiot.  A very stubborn idiot.

Actually it is you who is the idiot. He is the reason I started this thread because I kept reading intelligent provable data he was using and all you and your stubborn "conspiracy" buddies had nothing intelligent to offer him in return other then "its a lie".

You see there are thousands of employee's of NASA who have observed first hand the information he has provided you. They are called eye witnesses which in a court of law is the most damning evidence you can have against an individual. Their observations not only conclude and prove the earth is indeed round but they back it up with scientific evidence. You are calling them liars and saying it is all a cover up by NASA and the government, therefore all you have to do is prove this conspiracy to be true with real evidence. It should be way easier to do then just speculate on a FET.

Surely there has to be many many people who are dying to get this government deception out in the open to clear their collective consciences. Surely someone has the documentation to prove not only that NASA has been deceiving us for financial gain for the past 50 years but also that the earth is indeed flat. OH NO, ITS FLAT!!!!!!!

I just ask that you provide me with this evidence you have so I can erase my own personal deceptions.

Conspiracy is still an invalid argument and pure speculation but FErs continue to use it as some sort of defense. It holds no water.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17189
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #37 on: June 10, 2008, 12:14:42 PM »
Quote
You see there are thousands of employee's of NASA who have observed first hand the information he has provided you. They are called eye witnesses which in a court of law is the most damning evidence you can have against an individual. Their observations not only conclude and prove the earth is indeed round but they back it up with scientific evidence. You are calling them liars and saying it is all a cover up by NASA and the government, therefore all you have to do is prove this conspiracy to be true with real evidence. It should be way easier to do then just speculate on a FET.

An appeal to authority is a fallacy.

You must personally prove your claim of space travel. Asking us to take NASA's word for it isn't "proof"

Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #38 on: June 10, 2008, 12:18:50 PM »
Quote
You see there are thousands of employee's of NASA who have observed first hand the information he has provided you. They are called eye witnesses which in a court of law is the most damning evidence you can have against an individual. Their observations not only conclude and prove the earth is indeed round but they back it up with scientific evidence. You are calling them liars and saying it is all a cover up by NASA and the government, therefore all you have to do is prove this conspiracy to be true with real evidence. It should be way easier to do then just speculate on a FET.

An appeal to an authority is a fallacy. You must personally prove your claim of space travel without taking NASA's word for it.

As I told you before. You must prove that they are lying and prove FE without referencing the books you have read on FE. I see you do it all the time.

Must be a double standard that allows you to quote other "scholars" who are proponents of FE but I am not allowed to use NASA's teams of scientists to prove my point.

I am still waiting for you to post all your evidence of this conspiracy. In other words, instead of answering questions with "it's a conspiracy" I would like factual proof of your claims. Show me the list of detractors with their written or oral statements.

Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #39 on: June 10, 2008, 12:27:28 PM »
In your hypothetical, contradicting evidence would not exist.

In my hypothetical contradicting evidence does exist. Could you explain it without a conspiracy?
If contradicting evidence exists your hypothetical is not possible.  In an FE world, it should not be possible to predict and observe the appearance of orbiting satellites and spacecraft only based on raw orbital information.  If we observe satellites in orbit then we know we can refute the FE hypothesis.  You don't seem capable of grasping the concept of a null hypothesis.

You are an idiot.  A very stubborn idiot.
You have yet to prove me wrong, so what does that make you?

Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #40 on: June 10, 2008, 12:31:05 PM »
In your hypothetical, contradicting evidence would not exist.

In my hypothetical contradicting evidence does exist. Could you explain it without a conspiracy?
If contradicting evidence exists your hypothetical is not possible.  In an FE world, it should not be possible to predict and observe the appearance of orbiting satellites and spacecraft only based on raw orbital information.  If we observe satellites in orbit then we know we can refute the FE hypothesis.  You don't seem capable of grasping the concept of a null hypothesis.

You are an idiot.  A very stubborn idiot.
You have yet to prove me wrong, so what does that make you?

QFT

But he does that to everyone that I have seen. He knows he is out matched so he appeals to name calling.

*

lindelof

  • 422
  • DADA IS NOT DEAD. WATCH YOUR OVERCOAT.
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #41 on: June 10, 2008, 12:32:53 PM »
Nice thread Shaydawg.

So, let's us all do a little thought experment here.

Suppose that you're on teh interwebs and you find this account of a guy w/ no formal training has done some experiments that he thinks disprove General Relativity.

Now, would, you think it reasonable to suppose that he is 100% correct & General Relativity is totally false & all the evidence of General Relativity was faked by a conspiracy (which you have no evidence for)?

Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #42 on: June 10, 2008, 12:37:02 PM »
great point ^^


We also need to throw away all books and research that has been done in the past 300+ years because we cant appeal to them for evidence or it is a fallacy.

In order for something to be true you have to do the study yourself or it is not valid.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17189
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #43 on: June 10, 2008, 02:40:20 PM »
Quote
As I told you before. You must prove that they are lying and prove FE without referencing the books you have read on FE. I see you do it all the time.

Must be a double standard that allows you to quote other "scholars" who are proponents of FE but I am not allowed to use NASA's teams of scientists to prove my point.

I am still waiting for you to post all your evidence of this conspiracy. In other words, instead of answering questions with "it's a conspiracy" I would like factual proof of your claims. Show me the list of detractors with their written or oral statements.

Wrong. You came here and sought us out with your ridiculous claims of space men traveling to the moon and rocket ships blasting off into space. We did not seek you out. You came here and made a claim. Since the burden of proof is on he who makes the claim, you must prove that NASA does all of this stuff.

*

lindelof

  • 422
  • DADA IS NOT DEAD. WATCH YOUR OVERCOAT.
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #44 on: June 10, 2008, 02:47:09 PM »
Tom, you're making the claim that it's all faked.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #45 on: June 10, 2008, 02:50:39 PM »
Wrong. You came here and sought us out with your ridiculous claims of space men traveling to the moon and rocket ships blasting off into space.

Seriously, Tom, you need to look up the definition of the word "ridiculous".
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

lindelof

  • 422
  • DADA IS NOT DEAD. WATCH YOUR OVERCOAT.
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #46 on: June 10, 2008, 02:53:03 PM »
Yeah, what's so ridiculous about rocket ships anway?

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17189
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #47 on: June 10, 2008, 03:03:00 PM »
Quote
Tom, you're making the claim that it's all faked.

I'm simply holding the bare reasonable notion that such breakthrough technologies are outside of human experience. Since you believe something outside the norm of every day existence the burden of proof is on you to prove that it's true.

If a religious man claims that God exists, is the burden of proof on his opponents to prove that God does not exist or is the burden of proof on the religious man to prove that God does exist?

If a man claims that he invented a machine that can tunnel into the core of the earth where he talks to natives living within its hollow shell, is the burden of proof on his opponents to prove that the machine does not exist and his tales are untrue, or is the burden of proof on the man to prove his claims?

Just the same, when you whackos come on our site and claim that technologies exist which allow space men to travel through the cosmos, walk on the moon, and blast off in sci-fi space ships, the burden of proof is on you to prove your claim.

See: Russel's Teapot
« Last Edit: June 10, 2008, 03:11:31 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #48 on: June 10, 2008, 03:03:44 PM »
You have yet to prove me wrong, so what does that make you?

Correction.  You have yet to prove me wrong.  But my claim is about the Earth being flat (based on measurements) not about the conspiracy.

The subject of this thread is the use of conspiracy as an argument.  You have yet to prove that anyone is doing that.

Regarding the conspiracy, it is not an argument for our position.  It is a consequence of our position.  Accept that, and move on.

*

lindelof

  • 422
  • DADA IS NOT DEAD. WATCH YOUR OVERCOAT.
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #49 on: June 10, 2008, 03:14:53 PM »
Since you believe something outside the norm of every day existence the burden of proof is on you to prove that it's true.


Seems to me like a massive conspircy is outside the norm of every day existence.

No lived, the conspiracy is not just a consequence.  It is crucial to your position.  Without it, your position totally falls apart.

Also,

So, let's us all do a little thought experment here.

Suppose that you're on teh interwebs and you find this account of a guy w/ no formal training has done some experiments that he thinks disprove General Relativity.

Now, would, you think it reasonable to suppose that he is 100% correct & General Relativity is totally false & all the evidence of General Relativity was faked by a conspiracy (which you have no evidence for)?

« Last Edit: June 10, 2008, 03:16:41 PM by lindelof »

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17189
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #50 on: June 10, 2008, 03:17:12 PM »
Quote
Seems to me like a massive conspircy is outside the norm of every day existence.

Lies and deception are not outside of human experience.

In fact, it's pretty common.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2008, 03:31:40 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

lindelof

  • 422
  • DADA IS NOT DEAD. WATCH YOUR OVERCOAT.
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #51 on: June 10, 2008, 03:19:03 PM »
Quote
Seems to me like a massive conspircy is outside the norm of every day existence.

Lies and deception are not outside of human experience.

In fact, it's pretty common.

Not that sort of deception.

Also,

So, let's us all do a little thought experment here.

Suppose that you're on teh interwebs and you find this account of a guy w/ no formal training has done some experiments that he thinks disprove General Relativity.

Now, would, you think it reasonable to suppose that he is 100% correct & General Relativity is totally false & all the evidence of General Relativity was faked by a conspiracy (which you have no evidence for)?



*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #52 on: June 10, 2008, 03:21:33 PM »
No lived, the conspiracy is not just a consequence.  It is crucial to your position.  Without it, your position totally falls apart.

No, it's actually a crucial consequence.  It must exist for FET to be true, but it's never used in an effort to prove that the earth is flat.  FET is grounded in other evidence that FEers perceive proves the earth to be flat.  The evidence on which the theory is based has nothing to do with the conspiracy.  Since the earth is proven to be flat, any images or claims that contradict it must be part of an effort to conceal it.  But it's not something that's ever used as evidence that the earth is flat; rather, the fact that the earth is flat is evidence of a conspiracy.  The reverse is never claimed.

lived's right, it's time to move on.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17189
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #53 on: June 10, 2008, 03:24:54 PM »
Quote
Suppose that you're on teh interwebs and you find this account of a guy w/ no formal training has done some experiments that he thinks disprove General Relativity.

Now, would, you think it reasonable to suppose that he is 100% correct & General Relativity is totally false & all the evidence of General Relativity was faked by a conspiracy (which you have no evidence for)?

The burden of proof is on the man to prove his claims.

He is a liar by default.

*

Sean O'Grady

  • 625
  • Flat Earth Theorist
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #54 on: June 10, 2008, 03:25:55 PM »
So, let's us all do a little thought experment here.

Suppose that you're on teh interwebs and you find this account of a guy w/ no formal training has done some experiments that he thinks disprove General Relativity.

Now, would, you think it reasonable to suppose that he is 100% correct & General Relativity is totally false & all the evidence of General Relativity was faked by a conspiracy (which you have no evidence for)?

Well if I was on teh interwebs and I found some guy who had some formal training and had some experiments that he thinks prove that energy is misdefined and I could email him I wouldn't bother. Why would you?

Secondly would a conspiracy be necessary in a world where general relativity walse false? Genuine question.

I'm no lawyer I'm not trying to prove anything. I am merely trying to explain the universe as best I can so that it fits with the observable evidence. One of these is that the earth is flat (I have seen it when I went bunjee jumping over the Ice Wall), from there trying to explain the rest of the universe is quite an enjoyable challenge. A deep rooted conspiracy does fit nicely into it.

As I said, if you don't like the experiments that demonstrate that the earth is flat (such as looking out your window or bunjee jumping off the Ice Wall) then that's fine with me. I don't even mind you staying and asking questions, they help flesh out my understanding of the universe. But if you think for one second I give two shits whether you end up leaving here believing the earth is flat or round you've got a severely over-inflated ego.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 38039
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #55 on: June 10, 2008, 03:45:55 PM »
Quote
Suppose that you're on teh interwebs and you find this account of a guy w/ no formal training has done some experiments that he thinks disprove General Relativity.

Now, would, you think it reasonable to suppose that he is 100% correct & General Relativity is totally false & all the evidence of General Relativity was faked by a conspiracy (which you have no evidence for)?

The burden of proof is on the man to prove his claims.

He is a liar by default.

???  Wow!!  You are bold, aren't you.

Tom, you keep talking about the burden of proof being our responsibility.  Well, what about your responsibility to at least consider the evidence posed with an open mind?  Just because someone provides evidence that contradicts your beliefs, that does not automatically mean that they are lying.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Snaaaaake

  • 1089
  • ROUND000
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #56 on: June 10, 2008, 04:32:30 PM »
Quote
Tom, you're making the claim that it's all faked.

I'm simply holding the bare reasonable notion that such breakthrough technologies are outside of human experience. Since you believe something outside the norm of every day existence the burden of proof is on you to prove that it's true.

If a religious man claims that God exists, is the burden of proof on his opponents to prove that God does not exist or is the burden of proof on the religious man to prove that God does exist?

If a man claims that he invented a machine that can tunnel into the core of the earth where he talks to natives living within its hollow shell, is the burden of proof on his opponents to prove that the machine does not exist and his tales are untrue, or is the burden of proof on the man to prove his claims?

Just the same, when you whackos come on our site and claim that technologies exist which allow space men to travel through the cosmos, walk on the moon, and blast off in sci-fi space ships, the burden of proof is on you to prove your claim.

See: Russel's Teapot

Tom, humans have been to space. There is plenty of evidence. Look at the Internet itself. Somthing like that would have seemed god like 100 years ago. Now everyone looks at the Internet as a simple piece of technology. It's the same for space rockets.
We told you to go to rehab, but you were all like "no, no, no!" ::)

Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #57 on: June 10, 2008, 04:57:56 PM »
I'm simply holding the bare reasonable notion that such breakthrough technologies are outside of human experience.

This is the basic premise of your argument: that space travel is so difficult that a worlwide conspiracy is the more logical answer.

This is nonsense. Humanity was building pyramids 4000 years ago. The Nazis made a rocket that travelled almost to space in 1942. Since then we've made integrated circuits, Concorde, the Channel Tunnel, the internet, nanotechnology, supercomputers, the Burj Dubai, nuclear power, the LHC etc. etc. etc. Compared to these, space travel really isn't that difficult.

I argue that fooling the entire world (which was smart enough to make all of the above) would be far more difficult.

*

Sean O'Grady

  • 625
  • Flat Earth Theorist
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #58 on: June 10, 2008, 05:21:41 PM »
I argue that fooling the entire world (which was smart enough to make all of the above) would be far more difficult.

Absolutely... but how else would you account for NASA photos etc. when the world is flat?

*

Snaaaaake

  • 1089
  • ROUND000
Re: "Conspiracy" is not a valid argument
« Reply #59 on: June 10, 2008, 06:33:56 PM »
The problem with that is that it is not flat, and NASA didn't really even have good photoshop stuff in 1969.
We told you to go to rehab, but you were all like "no, no, no!" ::)