A Medical Perspective

  • 16 Replies
  • 2035 Views
?

PsycDoc

A Medical Perspective
« on: August 18, 2008, 08:41:02 PM »
First of all I must say that I am very glad I stumbled upon this site.  I am a board certified psychiatrist with a special interest in conspiracy and cult phenomena.  Now I must say that from what I have read so far, the Flat Earth Society does not possess all the characteristics of a “cult,” yet many of the threads I have read show classic presentations of cultist views.  i.e. the complete dismissal of the obvious and rational truth to be replaced with outlandish, irrational and twisted logic.  A perfect example of this is the FES’s explanation of how a lunar eclipse occurs: 
The logical (and correct) explanation is that the spherical earth aligns itself perfectly between the sun and the moon so that a crescent shadow (created by the curvature of the earth) is cast upon the moon.  A lunar eclipse can only be seen at night because that is when the viewer is on the side of the earth that is facing the moon.  These eclipses are 100% predictable as we know the exact trajectory of the celestial bodies in our solar system. 
Now we shall look at the explanation provided by the FES.  According to the FAQ’s, the spotlight sun casts light upon the earth which then reflects back on the moon.  Since different areas of the earth have different photo absorbancies (i.e. different percentages of a perfect black body) the light selectively reflects a specific pattern back onto the moon to create the eclipse.  OK, this explanation isn’t too bad, actually.  It has rational logic, and scientific roots; however there are two major components that make it not only unlikely, but impossible.  1) The shadow cast on the moon has a perfect arc, therefore in order for the FE theory to be possible, there would have to be a place on earth with a perfectly smooth demarcation between reflective surfaces… I certainly don’t think anything like that occurs on the earth surface. 2) everyone knows that the moon is sometimes visible during the day, so therefore since a flat earth only has one side, an eclipse should be visible from parts of the earth where it is "day."  I would be very curious to see if a FE proponent could predict an eclipse using their theory...
OK, let’s take another example.  I have read so many FE proponents say that gravity does not exist, and believing in gravity is the same as believing in “magic.”  I would be curious then to hear the explanation as to why a water droplet (or any free-falling liquid for that matter) coalesces into a perfect sphere.  I’m sure FE proponents have heard this argument many times before and are armed with a very interesting answer, but the truth is that the water molecules posses mass, and as such they are attracted together to form the most compact form possible; a sphere.
The issue of aviation travel over the South Pole appears to be a favorite for FE proponents because it is true that commercial flights do not fly over the south pole and any rational proof that can be given to prove that Antarctica is an island can easily be countered with irrational logic.  I am also a pilot, and for the record (for those of you who will believe the truth) the reason flights do not take this route is not for fear of flying of into space, but rather because of safety.  Unlike flying over the North Pole, antarctica is so far removed from anything that if there were to be an emergency, there would be little hopes of a rescue, and there would certainly not be any landing strips if a passenger started having a heart attack or what not.  When you are flying over the north pole you have the northern territories of Canada, Greenland and then before you know it you are in Russia.  Much safer.  Even trans-oceanic flights usually plot courses where emergency landing sites are no more than an hour or two away.  This however provides far too many “loop holes” that the FE’s could run with in their conspiracy, and therefore both sides will have to agree to disagree on this point and move on.
The bottom line is that no amount of internet ranting, theorem postulating or psychological evaluation is going to make this group change their minds.  The mind is a wonderfully mysterious thing that we are just starting to understand.  It has an amazing power to deny what it wants.  In a condition called parietal neglect, a person will actually deny their own body parts.  For example a person with this affliction may look at their arm, see that it is attached to their body, yet despite all the evidence, they choose not to believe it is part of them.  My advice to people is to not waste your time trying to convince this group.  In 20 years when space travel is open to the public you could take one of them into the weightlessness of space and they would probably say it was just an elaborate amusement park ride.  They seem to be a perfectly harmless bunch who just have a slightly delusional perspective.  I must say however that this level of denial is a serious risk factor for future, more damaging cultist involvement, and if any of you FE’s find yourself slipping into more dangerous cultist activity, you should seek help immediately.

   Lastly, I just had a few things I was hoping I could get explained. 

I know you think that satellites are not real, and GPS is done by land based towers.  This argument is very possible as we use this exact technology in aircraft LORAN (which was subsequently replaced by GPS).  How then do you explain the loss in satellite radio transmission when you pass underneath an overpass, or drive into your garage?  If the signal was coming from land based stations this would not be affected (you don’t drop cell phone calls when you pass under an overpass.)

What keeps the atmosphere on earth?  I understand that the “Ice Wall” keeps the water on, but if gravity does not exist what force prevents the atmosphere from being sucked into the vacuum of space at the border?  Is new air continuously being produced?  And if so, how?

Are the 4 elephants and turtle that the earth is resting on accelerating also at 1g? (see FAQ for any readers who don’t understand this question) ;)

Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #1 on: August 18, 2008, 08:47:50 PM »
I have decided that this thread is epic win.

But I can guarantee, every FE'er reply will be something along the lines of "tl;dr"

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 37568
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #2 on: August 18, 2008, 08:48:15 PM »
You are more likely to have someone read your post if you make a few quick comments about one or two points.  Not many people (RE or FE) have the patience to read a wall of text. 

You may also want to skip a line between paragraphs.  Makes it a whole lot easier to read.

You may also want to lurk more.  I didn't actually read your post, but I imagine that all of your questions and/or comments have been done to death already.

Cheers.
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.

?

spacemanjones

  • 281
  • Magic pushes earth
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #3 on: August 18, 2008, 09:03:10 PM »
I read it, it was hard on the eyes... the truth is most of RE already know that we couldn't change their minds. I look at it like a puzzle i read on of their theories and i want to figure out how to prove it wrong, even tho they wont agree they are wrong.

Good post i liked it.

Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #4 on: August 18, 2008, 09:11:50 PM »
what is tl:dr?

Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #5 on: August 18, 2008, 09:20:01 PM »
what is tl:dr?

I think it's latin for "I have adhd"

Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #6 on: August 18, 2008, 09:31:46 PM »
Too long; didn't read.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 16879
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #7 on: August 18, 2008, 09:42:42 PM »
If the OP really held a professional degree in the sciences, it just goes to show how much the average "scientist" knows about the world around him. There are a great number of errors and misinterpretations in his post.

Quote
The logical (and correct) explanation is that the spherical earth aligns itself perfectly between the sun and the moon so that a crescent shadow (created by the curvature of the earth) is cast upon the moon.  A lunar eclipse can only be seen at night because that is when the viewer is on the side of the earth that is facing the moon.  These eclipses are 100% predictable as we know the exact trajectory of the celestial bodies in our solar system.

WRONG. The only reason the Greeks and ancients (and modern astronomers) are able to predict the Lunar Eclipses was because the predictions are based on recurring charts and tables of past eclipses. It had nothing to do with the shape of the earth or the actual geometry of the cosmos. The Lunar Eclipse is a phenomenon which comes in patterns. By studying these patterns it is possible to predict when the next transit or eclipse will occur. The astronomer can use historic charts and tables with a few equations to predict the time, magnitude, and duration of a future eclipse. There's a good chapter in Zetetic Cosmogony on the subject.

http://books.google.com/books?id=GzkKAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA#PPA74,M1

Those same equations work just as well to predict the eclipse for the Flat Earth model.

Quote
OK, let’s take another example.  I have read so many FE proponents say that gravity does not exist, and believing in gravity is the same as believing in “magic.”  I would be curious then to hear the explanation as to why a water droplet (or any free-falling liquid for that matter) coalesces into a perfect sphere.

WRONG. Falling water droplets don't form spheres. They become flattened disks.



http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/science_sky/91232

http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/science_sky/91232/2

http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/almanac/arc2000/alm00jul.htm

http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/history/lenard.htm

Ergo, if we go by the OP's own logic (not recommended), we see from raindrops that the most natural shape is not a sphere but a flattened disk.

« Last Edit: August 18, 2008, 09:56:04 PM by Tom Bishop »

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #8 on: August 18, 2008, 10:17:51 PM »

Quote
OK, let’s take another example.  I have read so many FE proponents say that gravity does not exist, and believing in gravity is the same as believing in “magic.”  I would be curious then to hear the explanation as to why a water droplet (or any free-falling liquid for that matter) coalesces into a perfect sphere.

WRONG. Falling water droplets don't form spheres. They become flattened disks.



http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/science_sky/91232

http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/science_sky/91232/2

http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/almanac/arc2000/alm00jul.htm

http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/history/lenard.htm

Ergo, if we go by the OP's own logic (not recommended), we see from raindrops that the most natural shape is not a sphere but a flattened disk.


As usual, Tom Bishop does not read his own references. In the first reference the author said "By suspending many drops of known diameters, Lenard determined that small drops, those less than about 2 mm (0.08 inches) in diameter, fell as spheres".

Also, in a clear demonstration of intellectual dishonesty, he chooses to eliminate the middle image from the quoted article. These images are seen like this in the article:



A small mistake in the OP, neglecting to say "small drops" is dishonestly transformed into an attempt to call the author of the OP an ignorant.

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #9 on: August 18, 2008, 10:39:58 PM »
Hi Tom. Air resistance is irrelevant. The discussion expands upon the physics governing the droplets which defaults its shape to a sphere.

However, in the interest of being unbiased I can answer the original question on behalf of FE'ers with one word: cohesion. Gravity would be basically undetectable on such a small scale anyways to use a droplet as an example for gravity.
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

*

cbreiling

  • 112
  • The Earth is Flat
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #10 on: August 18, 2008, 11:49:40 PM »
The illustration above of a typical raindrop is way off the mark. (I suspect the graphic artist was instructed to draw a hamburger bun made of water.) Large raindrops are still sphere-like, but with a flattened bottom. There's no reference which refers to the natural shape of a raindrop being a flattened disk.

http://weather.about.com/od/cloudsandprecipitation/a/rainburgers.htm


If you consider planet formation in the near-vacuum of outer space to be like a small raindrop with no wind resistance, you get a "natural" sphere. But no matter, the Earth is still flat.  ;)
Quote from: lolz at trollz
It's because you asked about data. Theories can be pulled from the rectum without any apparent embarrassment, but pulling data from there is embarrassing even here. lol

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #11 on: August 19, 2008, 12:00:57 AM »
First of all I must say that I am very glad I stumbled upon this site.  I am a board certified psychiatrist with a special interest in conspiracy and cult phenomena.  Now I must say that from what I have read so far, the Flat Earth Society does not possess all the characteristics of a “cult,” yet many of the threads I have read show classic presentations of cultist views.  i.e. the complete dismissal of the obvious and rational truth to be replaced with outlandish, irrational and twisted logic.  A perfect example of this is the FES’s explanation of how a lunar eclipse occurs: 
The logical (and correct) explanation is that the spherical earth aligns itself perfectly between the sun and the moon so that a crescent shadow (created by the curvature of the earth) is cast upon the moon.  A lunar eclipse can only be seen at night because that is when the viewer is on the side of the earth that is facing the moon.  These eclipses are 100% predictable as we know the exact trajectory of the celestial bodies in our solar system. 
Now we shall look at the explanation provided by the FES.  According to the FAQ’s, the spotlight sun casts light upon the earth which then reflects back on the moon.  Since different areas of the earth have different photo absorbancies (i.e. different percentages of a perfect black body) the light selectively reflects a specific pattern back onto the moon to create the eclipse.  OK, this explanation isn’t too bad, actually.  It has rational logic, and scientific roots; however there are two major components that make it not only unlikely, but impossible.  1) The shadow cast on the moon has a perfect arc, therefore in order for the FE theory to be possible, there would have to be a place on earth with a perfectly smooth demarcation between reflective surfaces… I certainly don’t think anything like that occurs on the earth surface. 2) everyone knows that the moon is sometimes visible during the day, so therefore since a flat earth only has one side, an eclipse should be visible from parts of the earth where it is "day."  I would be very curious to see if a FE proponent could predict an eclipse using their theory...
OK, let’s take another example.  I have read so many FE proponents say that gravity does not exist, and believing in gravity is the same as believing in “magic.”  I would be curious then to hear the explanation as to why a water droplet (or any free-falling liquid for that matter) coalesces into a perfect sphere.  I’m sure FE proponents have heard this argument many times before and are armed with a very interesting answer, but the truth is that the water molecules posses mass, and as such they are attracted together to form the most compact form possible; a sphere.
The issue of aviation travel over the South Pole appears to be a favorite for FE proponents because it is true that commercial flights do not fly over the south pole and any rational proof that can be given to prove that Antarctica is an island can easily be countered with irrational logic.  I am also a pilot, and for the record (for those of you who will believe the truth) the reason flights do not take this route is not for fear of flying of into space, but rather because of safety.  Unlike flying over the North Pole, antarctica is so far removed from anything that if there were to be an emergency, there would be little hopes of a rescue, and there would certainly not be any landing strips if a passenger started having a heart attack or what not.  When you are flying over the north pole you have the northern territories of Canada, Greenland and then before you know it you are in Russia.  Much safer.  Even trans-oceanic flights usually plot courses where emergency landing sites are no more than an hour or two away.  This however provides far too many “loop holes” that the FE’s could run with in their conspiracy, and therefore both sides will have to agree to disagree on this point and move on.
The bottom line is that no amount of internet ranting, theorem postulating or psychological evaluation is going to make this group change their minds.  The mind is a wonderfully mysterious thing that we are just starting to understand.  It has an amazing power to deny what it wants.  In a condition called parietal neglect, a person will actually deny their own body parts.  For example a person with this affliction may look at their arm, see that it is attached to their body, yet despite all the evidence, they choose not to believe it is part of them.  My advice to people is to not waste your time trying to convince this group.  In 20 years when space travel is open to the public you could take one of them into the weightlessness of space and they would probably say it was just an elaborate amusement park ride.  They seem to be a perfectly harmless bunch who just have a slightly delusional perspective.  I must say however that this level of denial is a serious risk factor for future, more damaging cultist involvement, and if any of you FE’s find yourself slipping into more dangerous cultist activity, you should seek help immediately.

   Lastly, I just had a few things I was hoping I could get explained. 

I know you think that satellites are not real, and GPS is done by land based towers.  This argument is very possible as we use this exact technology in aircraft LORAN (which was subsequently replaced by GPS).  How then do you explain the loss in satellite radio transmission when you pass underneath an overpass, or drive into your garage?  If the signal was coming from land based stations this would not be affected (you don’t drop cell phone calls when you pass under an overpass.)

What keeps the atmosphere on earth?  I understand that the “Ice Wall” keeps the water on, but if gravity does not exist what force prevents the atmosphere from being sucked into the vacuum of space at the border?  Is new air continuously being produced?  And if so, how?

Are the 4 elephants and turtle that the earth is resting on accelerating also at 1g? (see FAQ for any readers who don’t understand this question) ;)

A real psychiatrist that can't spot the point of this site would need his license removed.

?

dyno

  • 562
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #12 on: August 19, 2008, 12:14:14 AM »


Quote
OK, let’s take another example.  I have read so many FE proponents say that gravity does not exist, and believing in gravity is the same as believing in “magic.”  I would be curious then to hear the explanation as to why a water droplet (or any free-falling liquid for that matter) coalesces into a perfect sphere.

WRONG. Falling water droplets don't form spheres. They become flattened disks.



http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/science_sky/91232

http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/science_sky/91232/2

http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/almanac/arc2000/alm00jul.htm

http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/history/lenard.htm

Ergo, if we go by the OP's own logic (not recommended), we see from raindrops that the most natural shape is not a sphere but a flattened disk.


Wrong
Lead shot was originally produced by dropping liquid lead into a quench source.
Try again

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36114
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #13 on: August 19, 2008, 04:18:26 AM »
First of all I must say that I am very glad I stumbled upon this site.  I am a board certified psychiatrist with a special interest in conspiracy and cult phenomena.  Now I must say that from what I have read so far, the Flat Earth Society does not possess all the characteristics of a “cult,” yet many of the threads I have read show classic presentations of cultist views.  i.e. the complete dismissal of the obvious and rational truth to be replaced with outlandish, irrational and twisted logic.  A perfect example of this is the FES’s explanation of how a lunar eclipse occurs: 
The logical (and correct) explanation is that the spherical earth aligns itself perfectly between the sun and the moon so that a crescent shadow (created by the curvature of the earth) is cast upon the moon.  A lunar eclipse can only be seen at night because that is when the viewer is on the side of the earth that is facing the moon.  These eclipses are 100% predictable as we know the exact trajectory of the celestial bodies in our solar system. 
Now we shall look at the explanation provided by the FES.  According to the FAQ’s, the spotlight sun casts light upon the earth which then reflects back on the moon.  Since different areas of the earth have different photo absorbancies (i.e. different percentages of a perfect black body) the light selectively reflects a specific pattern back onto the moon to create the eclipse.  OK, this explanation isn’t too bad, actually.  It has rational logic, and scientific roots; however there are two major components that make it not only unlikely, but impossible.  1) The shadow cast on the moon has a perfect arc, therefore in order for the FE theory to be possible, there would have to be a place on earth with a perfectly smooth demarcation between reflective surfaces… I certainly don’t think anything like that occurs on the earth surface. 2) everyone knows that the moon is sometimes visible during the day, so therefore since a flat earth only has one side, an eclipse should be visible from parts of the earth where it is "day."  I would be very curious to see if a FE proponent could predict an eclipse using their theory...
OK, let’s take another example.  I have read so many FE proponents say that gravity does not exist, and believing in gravity is the same as believing in “magic.”  I would be curious then to hear the explanation as to why a water droplet (or any free-falling liquid for that matter) coalesces into a perfect sphere.  I’m sure FE proponents have heard this argument many times before and are armed with a very interesting answer, but the truth is that the water molecules posses mass, and as such they are attracted together to form the most compact form possible; a sphere.
The issue of aviation travel over the South Pole appears to be a favorite for FE proponents because it is true that commercial flights do not fly over the south pole and any rational proof that can be given to prove that Antarctica is an island can easily be countered with irrational logic.  I am also a pilot, and for the record (for those of you who will believe the truth) the reason flights do not take this route is not for fear of flying of into space, but rather because of safety.  Unlike flying over the North Pole, antarctica is so far removed from anything that if there were to be an emergency, there would be little hopes of a rescue, and there would certainly not be any landing strips if a passenger started having a heart attack or what not.  When you are flying over the north pole you have the northern territories of Canada, Greenland and then before you know it you are in Russia.  Much safer.  Even trans-oceanic flights usually plot courses where emergency landing sites are no more than an hour or two away.  This however provides far too many “loop holes” that the FE’s could run with in their conspiracy, and therefore both sides will have to agree to disagree on this point and move on.
The bottom line is that no amount of internet ranting, theorem postulating or psychological evaluation is going to make this group change their minds.  The mind is a wonderfully mysterious thing that we are just starting to understand.  It has an amazing power to deny what it wants.  In a condition called parietal neglect, a person will actually deny their own body parts.  For example a person with this affliction may look at their arm, see that it is attached to their body, yet despite all the evidence, they choose not to believe it is part of them.  My advice to people is to not waste your time trying to convince this group.  In 20 years when space travel is open to the public you could take one of them into the weightlessness of space and they would probably say it was just an elaborate amusement park ride.  They seem to be a perfectly harmless bunch who just have a slightly delusional perspective.  I must say however that this level of denial is a serious risk factor for future, more damaging cultist involvement, and if any of you FE’s find yourself slipping into more dangerous cultist activity, you should seek help immediately.

   Lastly, I just had a few things I was hoping I could get explained. 

I know you think that satellites are not real, and GPS is done by land based towers.  This argument is very possible as we use this exact technology in aircraft LORAN (which was subsequently replaced by GPS).  How then do you explain the loss in satellite radio transmission when you pass underneath an overpass, or drive into your garage?  If the signal was coming from land based stations this would not be affected (you don’t drop cell phone calls when you pass under an overpass.)

What keeps the atmosphere on earth?  I understand that the “Ice Wall” keeps the water on, but if gravity does not exist what force prevents the atmosphere from being sucked into the vacuum of space at the border?  Is new air continuously being produced?  And if so, how?

Are the 4 elephants and turtle that the earth is resting on accelerating also at 1g? (see FAQ for any readers who don’t understand this question) ;)


tl;dr
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #14 on: August 19, 2008, 04:38:15 AM »
A real psychiatrist that can't spot the point of this site would need his license removed.

QFT.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

?

PsycDoc

Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #15 on: August 19, 2008, 04:47:44 AM »
Hi Tom. Air resistance is irrelevant. The discussion expands upon the physics governing the droplets which defaults its shape to a sphere.

However, in the interest of being unbiased I can answer the original question on behalf of FE'ers with one word: cohesion. Gravity would be basically undetectable on such a small scale anyways to use a droplet as an example for gravity.

Sorry for the long post, I have a tendency to rabble on..

Yes, of course.  Cohesion IS the cause, thanks for the correction.  Sorry, physics was quite a while ago, and I know that I have no hope of convincing anyone with my knowledge in that field.  My post was simply to demonstrate how powerfully the mind can believe what it wants.   

...But mainly I would like an explanation to my satellite radio question as this is a simple observation that anyone can make. How could land based towers produce this behavior?  Would they simply be able to triangulate your position using the (GPS) to know that you are under a bridge and cut the signal?  What about in the garage of my new house.  Surely that has not been added to the "database" of signal cutting locations ;)

*

cbreiling

  • 112
  • The Earth is Flat
Re: A Medical Perspective
« Reply #16 on: August 19, 2008, 05:54:28 AM »
I have decided that this thread is epic win.

But I can guarantee, every FE'er reply will be something along the lines of "tl;dr"

Quote from: Robosteve
tl;dr

Epic win!
Quote from: lolz at trollz
It's because you asked about data. Theories can be pulled from the rectum without any apparent embarrassment, but pulling data from there is embarrassing even here. lol