« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?

  • 46 Replies
  • 10447 Views
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45085
  • +87/-119
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #30 on: May 18, 2009, 03:11:55 PM »
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on May 18, 2009, 02:57:30 PM
Quote from: markjo on May 18, 2009, 02:55:57 PM
Last I knew, that Bigfoot photo has been thoroughly analyzed my many independent experts and has not been conclusively proven to be a fake.

Apparently you are bias to the conclusion that picture draws.

I didn't say that it was conclusively proven to be true either.
Logged
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.
?

munkirench

  • 231
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #31 on: May 18, 2009, 03:23:08 PM »
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on May 18, 2009, 02:35:37 PM
Just because its not doctored doesn't mean its not a fake.  Would you agree?
Yes, but in this context they amount to the same thing: dissemination of false information.  Faking or doctoring both require motive.
Logged
When I look out my window, I see exactly what RET predicts.
?

MisterHamper

  • 212
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #32 on: May 18, 2009, 04:37:01 PM »
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on May 18, 2009, 02:57:30 PM
Quote from: markjo on May 18, 2009, 02:55:57 PM
Last I knew, that Bigfoot photo has been thoroughly analyzed my many independent experts and has not been conclusively proven to be a fake.

Apparently you are bias to the conclusion that picture draws.

Nope, he is saying that tons of independent experts analyze such pictures in order to prove if it is real or fake. The same is done with pretty much all UFO-photos and pretty much all photos that have an outlandish claim - because people want to know the truth (which you obviously don't, because you wouldn't be so closed-minded if you wanted to).
How the f*ck do you think they can use pictures in a court as evidence and as helping evidence? It isn't as easy to properly fake a picture as you might think. It is actually VERY VERY hard. And one would easily be able to tell that the Crouscent (?) planet is a faked CGI, if one had the proper education for it.

And you can bet your ass that all those photos and videos from NASA have been analyzed VERY carefully and throughout by thousands of experts and regular people. Both from governments, private companies and individuals. Lets take a famous example: Do you remember all the fuss about the moon landing recently? Yeah, several thousands people looked at it, and the "moon landing hoax" theory was debunked (many times, indeed, since a few percentage of the population can't grasp simple logic like how the flag would move or how there would be no visible stars or how there is multiple shadows in many directions etc).
« Last Edit: May 18, 2009, 04:49:40 PM by MisterHamper »
Logged
?

Henrythecamel

  • 47
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #33 on: May 18, 2009, 05:22:20 PM »
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on May 18, 2009, 02:35:37 PM
Just because its not doctored doesn't mean its not a fake.  Would you agree?


agreed.. but it depends what u mean by fake

the trees r real, the rocks r real and the guy in the monkey costume is real..
some1 sayin it is big foot would be a lie..
so if im gonna be pedantic then the picture isnt a fake, the assumption that its bigfoot is

apply this to photos or videos of earth that havent been doctored and the only way they can be "fake" is if its not really the earth at all


what the FES really needs is some1 with a good eye for spottin doctored film.. sayin somethin COULD be fake doesnt mean much untill u can show that it actually is fake...
Logged
*

Soze

  • 1291
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth Proponent
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #34 on: May 18, 2009, 06:53:49 PM »
Modern science is built on skepticism. Photos are demonstratively unreliable sources of proof, and therefore it is only scientific to remain skeptical of them.
Logged
?

Henrythecamel

  • 47
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #35 on: May 18, 2009, 07:35:24 PM »
Quote from: Soze on May 18, 2009, 06:53:49 PM
Modern science is built on skepticism. Photos are demonstratively unreliable sources of proof, and therefore it is only scientific to remain skeptical of them.


how scientific is it to say all photos r fake just because they could be..
bein skeptical would involve testin them in someway, not simply denyin the possibility that its real

the main problem with this is that its up to the FEers to test them.. if u test a photo and its been doctored u can show why uv come to that conclusion, but if it hasnt been doctored all u can do is say theres nothin dodgy about it and they have to take ur word for it..


to be fair, if just 1 nasa photo of the earth from space was shown to be doctored that would get me thinkin at least and be a huge boost to this conspiracy theory.. it kinda makes u wonder why TFES hasnt done this already
or maybe they did and for some reason decided it would be best to ignore the results..



meh, sorry for any bad grammar and if that didnt make any sense.. its late, iv lost the effort and my grammar is dire at the best of times
Logged
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45085
  • +87/-119
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #36 on: May 18, 2009, 07:36:26 PM »
Quote from: Soze on May 18, 2009, 06:53:49 PM
Modern science is built on skepticism. Photos are demonstratively unreliable sources of proof, and therefore it is only scientific to remain skeptical of them.

People are demonstrably unreliable sources too, so forgive me if I'm skeptical of your opinions.
Logged
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.
?

Grawrrrr

  • 26
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #37 on: May 19, 2009, 12:18:50 AM »
Quote from: divito the truthist on May 18, 2009, 10:21:58 AM
Quote from: MisterHamper on May 17, 2009, 10:32:00 AM
A round Earth alright.
You can clearly see that everything just "stops" at a certain point. Can clearly see it is not just an "effect" caused by "thick atmosphere", because you would still be able to see <something> through a "fog". So either way, the Earth LOOKS round. You can explain that the earth LOOKS round by saying it is "bendy light" or using occam's razor, either way is fine by me.

A vanishing point exists regardless of whether the Earth is round or not. There is a limit to what the eye can see in terms of distance.
That is true but that stars if talking FE earth are ummm 5000km away or talking RE earth are actually light years away meaning we can still see them right and FE stars are a hell of a lot smaller O.o
Logged
?

Grawrrrr

  • 26
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #38 on: May 19, 2009, 12:26:45 AM »
Quote from: Grawrrrr on May 19, 2009, 12:18:50 AM
Quote from: divito the truthist on May 18, 2009, 10:21:58 AM
Quote from: MisterHamper on May 17, 2009, 10:32:00 AM
A round Earth alright.
You can clearly see that everything just "stops" at a certain point. Can clearly see it is not just an "effect" caused by "thick atmosphere", because you would still be able to see <something> through a "fog". So either way, the Earth LOOKS round. You can explain that the earth LOOKS round by saying it is "bendy light" or using occam's razor, either way is fine by me.

A vanishing point exists regardless of whether the Earth is round or not. There is a limit to what the eye can see in terms of distance.
That is true but that stars if talking FE earth are ummm 5000km away or talking RE earth are actually light years away meaning we can still see them right and FE stars are a hell of a lot smaller O.o
but than meaning there like umm 5000km away and 50km in diameter meaning if i did the math which it is too late too and ill prob make flaws i could probably see mount everest from idk 100km away or something idk but you get my drift if we cut the bendy light stuff that we all know has not been proven in anyway like not even a book about how its true so ummm just saying things vanish at a certain distant to the human eye yes but get a telescope you'll see mount everst from where im standing on a flat earth if i get it right
Logged
?

Grawrrrr

  • 26
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #39 on: May 19, 2009, 12:31:09 AM »
That is true but that stars if talking FE earth are ummm 5000km away or talking RE earth are actually light years away meaning we can still see them right and FE stars are a hell of a lot smaller O.o
but than meaning there like umm 5000km away and 50km in diameter meaning if i did the math which it is too late too and ill prob make flaws i could probably see mount everest from idk 100km away or something idk but you get my drift if we cut the bendy light stuff that we all know has not been proven in anyway like not even a book about how its true so ummm just saying things vanish at a certain distant to the human eye yes but get a telescope you'll see mount everst from where im standing on a flat earth if i get it right and mount baker which is smaller than mount everst and is a while away and since it is a RE earth i can still see it and if its FE it would have to be wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy far away for me not to see it like its quite a ways away but not tons so common the whole size thing doesnt rly matter for those stars cause if you work it mount everst would look the same size are those FE stars if it was that far away but they are actually further and even bigger so you know the math is a bit more complicated =/
Logged
?

Grawrrrr

  • 26
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #40 on: May 19, 2009, 08:06:32 PM »
it is a response to the first page there is a limit to what the eyes can see meaning kicking out bendy light junk which i really think there is no reason to believe because i dont see any tests for it to prove it, anyways that the eye can see things a lot farther, a lot, lot farther than a round earth and would defiantly be able to bloody very tall mountains if you were such as idk 100km or w.e idc but you know what i mean away from the mountain... meaning and please dont put in bendy light we know its just a defense like many other things groups make up to get them to believe it because they need a defense, like the catholic church sometimes ( and yes I am catholic and i am willing to admit, they lie a helly a lot) okay so seriously dont use the bendy light theory because it is just a theory you made outta no where from what i can believe but anyways meaning we can see large things meaning if this earth was flat than we would be able to see Ships from kilometres away and mountains from even farther easy
and dont do anything like this is complete jibberish because i know ppl get this jist of what I'm saying even if i do carry on and make theorys too meaning yes i can be wrong, its amazing I admited it but that if it was a flat earth than we could spy on ppl easy if they were a long area away and satelites would be useless and yes in FE satelites are BS but you know like they do have google earth seems to work dont think they are gonna draw pictures of my house on that because a satelite doesnt exist :P
Logged
?

Franklube

Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #41 on: May 20, 2009, 08:52:13 AM »
no
Logged
?

Grawrrrr

  • 26
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #42 on: May 20, 2009, 01:03:42 PM »
no.. O.o interesting response :P
Logged
?

utilitarianism

  • 176
  • +0/-0
  • do you know the muffin man...
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #43 on: May 21, 2009, 08:56:30 PM »
in terms of logical arguments here are mine

this one proves a conspiracy theory
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=28451.0

this one disproves gravity (the name is misleading)
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=29113.0
Logged
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45085
  • +87/-119
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #44 on: May 22, 2009, 06:30:28 AM »
Quote from: utilitarianism on May 21, 2009, 08:56:30 PM
in terms of logical arguments here are mine

this one proves a conspiracy theory
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=28451.0

this one disproves gravity (the name is misleading)
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=29113.0

Just because you don't understand the physics involved, that doesn't mean that there is a conspiracy or that gravity (gravitation) doesn't exist.
Logged
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.
?

brathearon

  • 199
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2009, 11:33:30 AM »
Quote from: Soze on May 18, 2009, 06:53:49 PM
Modern science is built on skepticism. Photos are demonstratively unreliable sources of proof, and therefore it is only scientific to remain skeptical of them.


your career depends on your honesty.  Not you specificlly, but anyone who posts those photos as authentic sources to their superiors.
Logged
?

echa

  • 78
  • +0/-0
Re: are there any LOGICAL arguments for a flat earth?
« Reply #46 on: May 22, 2009, 04:31:08 PM »
Quote from: utilitarianism on May 21, 2009, 08:56:30 PM
in terms of logical arguments here are mine

this one proves a conspiracy theory
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=28451.0

this one disproves gravity (the name is misleading)
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=29113.0
Those two threads alone prove that you're either a child or a moron. The math and logic you used were so terrible even your fellow flat earther's destroyed you and your arguments. Those two threads are hardly a reason to consider FET.
Logged
"If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed."

"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts."
-Albert Einstein

Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
« previous next »