« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Bedford Level wager

  • 108 Replies
  • 35134 Views
?

cdenley

  • 296
  • +0/-0
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #30 on: June 19, 2009, 12:55:51 PM »
Isn't anybody going to address the result of the experiment?
Logged
?

equinox

  • 157
  • +0/-0
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #31 on: June 19, 2009, 02:06:20 PM »
They do not address anything which does not either support a flat earth, or that they can't make up pseudo-science to make FET fit what is observed.
Logged
*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #32 on: June 19, 2009, 02:06:46 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 18, 2009, 09:38:24 PM
Hampden and his referee looked into the telescope and announced that they had won the wager. They even jumped for joy in celebration.
Logged
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #33 on: June 19, 2009, 02:10:27 PM »
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 19, 2009, 06:46:37 AM
Was Carpenter - a Flat Earther, I presume - an idiot?
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
?

equinox

  • 157
  • +0/-0
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #34 on: June 19, 2009, 02:12:42 PM »
As Tom conveniently points out one small snippet of the book he himself has been touting, and ignores the rest of the work.

Well done, scientist Tom.
Logged
?

cdenley

  • 296
  • +0/-0
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #35 on: June 19, 2009, 02:13:20 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 19, 2009, 02:06:46 PM
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 18, 2009, 09:38:24 PM
Hampden and his referee looked into the telescope and announced that they had won the wager. They even jumped for joy in celebration.
Regardless of what idiotic conslusions they drew or proofs they ignored, I was asking about the results of the experiment, not the wager.
Quote from: cdenley on June 19, 2009, 06:31:17 AM
He observed that the centre marker was somewhat below the cross-hair on the telescope, and the far marker on Old Bedford Bridge the same distance again below that. Under usual circumstances this would be interpreted as evidence of the earth curving gently away from the observer, but Carpenter claimed that the equal intervals between the cross-hair, the centre marker and the Old Bedford Bridge marker proved that all three points were in a straight line.
Logged
*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #36 on: June 19, 2009, 02:44:49 PM »
No one can say what Hampden and Carpenter observed except Hampden and Carpenter.

After looking into the telescope they obviously saw that they had won. That same evening Hampden even confronted Wallace in a pub and demanded that he declare himself the lesser scientist.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2009, 05:11:22 PM by Tom Bishop »
Logged
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #37 on: June 19, 2009, 02:51:53 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 19, 2009, 02:44:49 PM
After looking into the telescope they obviously saw that they won. That same evening Hampden even confronted Wallace in a pub and demanded that he declare himself the lesser scientist.

Is that the same Hampden who was convicted for libel towards Wallace?

If so it doesn't say much about his trustwortyness, does it?
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #38 on: June 19, 2009, 02:53:35 PM »
It's not libel if it's true.
Logged
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45093
  • +87/-124
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #39 on: June 19, 2009, 02:55:11 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 19, 2009, 02:53:35 PM
It's not libel if it's true.

Since it was determined to be libel, then obviously it wasn't true.
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.
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #40 on: June 19, 2009, 02:55:29 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 19, 2009, 02:53:35 PM
It's not libel if it's true.

But what did the court say, Tom?

Hampden was convicted of libel towards Wallace.

Or, to put it in modern language:

Hampden was a dishonest lying little shit!

Why the hell are you defending him?
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #41 on: June 19, 2009, 03:01:54 PM »
Quote from: markjo on June 19, 2009, 02:55:11 PM
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 19, 2009, 02:53:35 PM
It's not libel if it's true.

Since it was determined to be libel, then obviously it wasn't true.

Courts aren't the arbiters of truth.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2009, 03:17:23 PM by Tom Bishop »
Logged
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45093
  • +87/-124
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #42 on: June 19, 2009, 03:04:21 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 19, 2009, 03:01:54 PM
Quote from: markjo on June 19, 2009, 02:55:11 PM
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 19, 2009, 02:53:35 PM
It's not libel if it's true.

Since it was determined to be libel, then obviously it wasn't true.

Courts aren't the arbiter of truth.

Actually, in this case they were.  What do you think that libel cases are all about?  ???
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.
*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #43 on: June 19, 2009, 03:17:13 PM »
Quote from: markjo on June 19, 2009, 03:04:21 PM
What do you think that libel cases are all about?  ???

Defamation of character.
Logged
*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
  • +1/-0
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #44 on: June 19, 2009, 04:41:52 PM »
People are wrongly imprisoned all the time, even in the modern day. In Victorian Britain, the same was true, even more than today. Hampden was imprisoned as the result of deliberate, aggressive legal action by his globularist enemies, who sought to cement their fallacious notions into the public mind by obliterating their opposition. Hampden stood by his beliefs in the face of heinous globular skullduggery, martyring himself and facing imprisonment and bankruptcy in the name of truth.
Logged
"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #45 on: June 20, 2009, 12:47:40 AM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 19, 2009, 03:01:54 PM
Quote from: markjo on June 19, 2009, 02:55:11 PM
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 19, 2009, 02:53:35 PM
It's not libel if it's true.

Since it was determined to be libel, then obviously it wasn't true.

Courts aren't the arbiters of truth.


They are if one defines truth as "beyond all reasonable doubt" - as anyone who has done jury service, as I have, knows all too well.

Courts are a cornerstone of a civilised and democratic society - and if you choose to reject this notion, then you should choose to live as an "outlaw" and go and live in a hut in some forest or wasteland somewhere.
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #46 on: June 20, 2009, 12:49:05 AM »
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 20, 2009, 12:47:40 AM
They are if one defines truth as "beyond all reasonable doubt"

Which no sane person would.
Logged
Quote from: Ævan on August 11, 2013, 01:18:20 PM
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #47 on: June 20, 2009, 12:57:09 AM »
Quote from: Robosteve on June 20, 2009, 12:49:05 AM
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 20, 2009, 12:47:40 AM
They are if one defines truth as "beyond all reasonable doubt"

Which no sane person would.

It is the definition that any reasonable person would agree with ...

And that is the basis of a civilised and cooperative society, I would suggest.

"Sanity" is far too subjective and personal a concept to be used.

I may think that Levee, for example, is "bat shit crazy" ...

And he is free to think the same of me ...

What we have to do is to learn to live and interact with each other in a reasonable way.

Idealists may disagree, but idealists are some of the most dangerous people around.
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #48 on: June 20, 2009, 03:01:23 AM »
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 20, 2009, 12:57:09 AM
It is the definition that any reasonable person would agree with ...

No it isn't. If new evidence comes to light, it doesn't change what the truth is, only our perception of it.
Logged
Quote from: Ævan on August 11, 2013, 01:18:20 PM
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.
?

cdenley

  • 296
  • +0/-0
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #49 on: June 20, 2009, 01:36:41 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 19, 2009, 02:44:49 PM
No one can say what Hampden and Carpenter observed except Hampden and Carpenter.

After looking into the telescope they obviously saw that they had won. That same evening Hampden even confronted Wallace in a pub and demanded that he declare himself the lesser scientist.

Are you now saying that the book you referenced repeatedly about this wager and list in your signature link which has its own sticky is incorrect? Did you read the quote I took directly from your own book? It clearly stated Carpenter's observations, as well as how he claimed to interpret what he saw. You are beginning to appear as dense as Carpenter and Hampden were by ignoring what has been put in front of you.
Quote
He observed that the centre marker was somewhat below the cross-hair on the telescope, and the far marker on Old Bedford Bridge the same distance again below that. Under usual circumstances this would be interpreted as evidence of the earth curving gently away from the observer, but Carpenter claimed that the equal intervals between the cross-hair, the centre marker and the Old Bedford Bridge marker proved that all three points were in a straight line.
Logged
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #50 on: June 21, 2009, 02:57:05 AM »
Quote from: Robosteve on June 20, 2009, 03:01:23 AM
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 20, 2009, 12:57:09 AM
It is the definition that any reasonable person would agree with ...

No it isn't. If new evidence comes to light, it doesn't change what the truth is, only our perception of it.

You appear to have a poor understanding of how The British Justice System functions.

Either that, or you enjoy "trolling".
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #51 on: June 21, 2009, 03:04:44 AM »
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 21, 2009, 02:57:05 AM
You appear to have a poor understanding of how The British Justice System functions.

You appear to have a poor understanding of the fact that the justice system does not define the truth.
Logged
Quote from: Ævan on August 11, 2013, 01:18:20 PM
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.
?

Crudblud

  • 2427
  • +0/-0
  • Scone Advocate
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #52 on: June 21, 2009, 03:11:44 AM »
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 21, 2009, 02:57:05 AM
Quote from: Robosteve on June 20, 2009, 03:01:23 AM
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 20, 2009, 12:57:09 AM
It is the definition that any reasonable person would agree with ...

No it isn't. If new evidence comes to light, it doesn't change what the truth is, only our perception of it.

You appear to have a poor understanding of how The British Justice System functions.

Either that, or you enjoy "trolling".
I'm British, and I can tell you right now the that British justice system doesn't function at all. This is why, when you turn on the news, there's always at least one article about a man who raped three girls and only got 4 years imprisonment, or someone driving a lorry killing six people in a motorway collision and receiving 3 years with bail after 6 months. If you think the British justice system works, you have a warped sense of what is "reasonable."

Beyond all "reasonable" doubt also caused an innocent man to be jailed for the best part of 10 years in the Jill Dando murder case.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2009, 03:13:54 AM by Crudblud »
Logged
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #53 on: June 21, 2009, 03:31:09 AM »
Quote from: Robosteve on June 21, 2009, 03:04:44 AM
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 21, 2009, 02:57:05 AM
You appear to have a poor understanding of how The British Justice System functions.

You appear to have a poor understanding of the fact that the justice system does not define the truth.

The Justice System is a practical tool to promote the security and well-being of society at large - as well you know.

Whereas "The Truth" that you are talking about is an academic and elusive concept.

Therefore I suspect that you are trying - as you often seem to do - to deflect the debate into an area that is less dangerous for your Flat Earth POV.

Besides, if one could only "bang up" murderers and rapists if their guilt was proved absolutely then our prisons would be empty and society would "go to Hell in a handcart"!
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36019
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #54 on: June 21, 2009, 03:48:58 AM »
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 21, 2009, 03:31:09 AM
The Justice System is a practical tool to promote the security and well-being of society at large - as well you know.

That is its intended function, whether it is successful or not in performing this function is open to debate. Regardless, that does not make its judgements in any way relevant to the truth.
Logged
Quote from: Ævan on August 11, 2013, 01:18:20 PM
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #55 on: June 21, 2009, 03:51:22 AM »
Quote from: Robosteve on June 21, 2009, 03:48:58 AM
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 21, 2009, 03:31:09 AM
The Justice System is a practical tool to promote the security and well-being of society at large - as well you know.

That is its intended function, whether it is successful or not in performing this function is open to debate.

That's why I said "promote", not achieve.
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
?

cdenley

  • 296
  • +0/-0
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #56 on: June 21, 2009, 07:20:27 AM »
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 21, 2009, 03:51:22 AM
That's why I said "promote", not achieve.
I would prefer to keep this thread on subject, rather than debate how well the British Justice System works. They still haven't addressed the results of the experiment as observer by Carpenter.
Logged
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12086
  • +3/-3
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #57 on: June 21, 2009, 07:30:32 AM »
I'm not sure we can to be honest. What he observed is something only he can know. Remember, Christine Garwood is not a FE'er, and like I said, her beliefs are apparent in the writing. All I'm saying is that it is best to discuss the facts, and not the way they are presented.
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
?

cdenley

  • 296
  • +0/-0
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #58 on: June 21, 2009, 07:51:21 AM »
Quote from: NEEMAN on June 21, 2009, 07:30:32 AM
I'm not sure we can to be honest. What he observed is something only he can know. Remember, Christine Garwood is not a FE'er, and like I said, her beliefs are apparent in the writing. All I'm saying is that it is best to discuss the facts, and not the way they are presented.
It's not about the way facts are presented, but what she states Carpenter actually observed.
Quote
He observed that the centre marker was somewhat below the cross-hair on the telescope, and the far marker on Old Bedford Bridge the same distance again below that.
This is written as a fact. If you don't trust her stated facts, then stop using her book as a reference. I suppose you simply pick and choose the facts which seem to support your theory, and ignore the rest.
Logged
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12086
  • +3/-3
Re: Bedford Level wager
« Reply #59 on: June 21, 2009, 11:21:56 AM »
Quote from: cdenley on June 21, 2009, 07:51:21 AM
Quote
He observed that the centre marker was somewhat below the cross-hair on the telescope, and the far marker on Old Bedford Bridge the same distance again below that.
This is written as a fact. If you don't trust her stated facts, then stop using her book as a reference. I suppose you simply pick and choose the facts which seem to support your theory, and ignore the rest.

The word I've bolded and underlined is key here. Only he can know what he saw. And frankly, you can suppose whatever you like. The fact remains that I have done nothing of the sort.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2009, 02:22:19 PM by NEEMAN »
Logged
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up
« previous next »