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

RET, what is wrong with it?

  • 37 Replies
  • 9753 Views
*

shades

  • 175
  • +0/-0
  • Occam's Razor is not BS. Let's move on.
RET, what is wrong with it?
« on: September 16, 2009, 12:51:01 PM »
Why did FET get created? What is wrong with RET? Are there inconsistencies? Are there flaws?

I don't want blanket statements here like: "RET is wrong because the earth is flat." Or "It makes you make stupid assumptions that don't make sense."

I want actual evidence that suggests RET is incorrect.
Logged
Quote from: W on September 17, 2009, 06:09:43 PM
It's not spam, it's my catchphrase!
*

Kathleen Wilcox

  • 102
  • +0/-0
  • Lux sit
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2009, 01:01:43 PM »
The last time I looked across the dry Texas plains, the earth appeared flat. Have you ever looked across the plains and noticed curvature?
Logged
"My soul finds rest in God alone: My salvation comes from Him."
?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3125
  • +0/-0
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2009, 01:07:20 PM »
Quote from: Kathleen Wilcox on September 16, 2009, 01:01:43 PM
The last time I looked across the dry Texas plains, the earth appeared flat. Have you ever looked across the plains and noticed curvature?

Last time I looked up at the surrounding mountains from the valley I was standing in, the earth looked concave: therefore, it is concave.
Try harder Kathleen. Simply putting your eye close to a big ball will demonstrate how the closer you are to a gigantic curve the flatter it looks.
Logged
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.
*

shades

  • 175
  • +0/-0
  • Occam's Razor is not BS. Let's move on.
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2009, 01:37:56 PM »
Quote from: Kathleen Wilcox on September 16, 2009, 01:01:43 PM
The last time I looked across the dry Texas plains, the earth appeared flat. Have you ever looked across the plains and noticed curvature?

Actually yes, but it so faint that you probably won't see it, purely because you won't let yourself see it.
Logged
Quote from: W on September 17, 2009, 06:09:43 PM
It's not spam, it's my catchphrase!
*

Supertails

  • 4376
  • +0/-0
  • what do i put here
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2009, 01:55:46 PM »
Come on, Kat.  You know just as well as anyone else that you won't see curvature like that.
Logged
Recently listened to:

?

Proleg

Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2009, 02:00:25 PM »
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on September 16, 2009, 01:07:20 PM
Last time I looked up at the surrounding mountains from the valley I was standing in, the earth looked concave: therefore, it is concave.
Mountains and valleys are, by definition, aberrations in terrain. You fail.
Logged
?

loki700

  • 98
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2009, 02:04:45 PM »
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on September 16, 2009, 01:07:20 PM
Quote from: Kathleen Wilcox on September 16, 2009, 01:01:43 PM
The last time I looked across the dry Texas plains, the earth appeared flat. Have you ever looked across the plains and noticed curvature?

Last time I looked up at the surrounding mountains from the valley I was standing in, the earth looked concave: therefore, it is concave.
Try harder Kathleen. Simply putting your eye close to a big ball will demonstrate how the closer you are to a gigantic curve the flatter it looks.
Exactly, land will appear flat, and seeing as it is a curve you won't see curvature on a plain, even if you can see 12 miles out, because the ground will go down, and at that distance trees/cacti would not bee too visible.

Plus land is a bad medium for showing the earth is round or flat because the ground can deviate and we won't know.  Water can still deviate but usually nowhere near as much as land can, and it will be noticeable.  That's why textbooks never use a car appearing as an example of a round earth, they always used a ship in water.
Logged
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45159
  • +98/-136
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2009, 02:16:25 PM »
Quote from: Kathleen Wilcox on September 16, 2009, 01:01:43 PM
The last time I looked across the dry Texas plains, the earth appeared flat. Have you ever looked across the plains and noticed curvature?

Just out of curiosity, just how much curvature would you expect to see if you were standing on a sphere about 7900 miles in diameter?
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.
?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3125
  • +0/-0
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2009, 03:11:58 PM »
Quote from: Proleg on September 16, 2009, 02:00:25 PM
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on September 16, 2009, 01:07:20 PM
Last time I looked up at the surrounding mountains from the valley I was standing in, the earth looked concave: therefore, it is concave.
Mountains and valleys are, by definition, aberrations in terrain. You fail.

A plain is, by definition, an aberration in terrain as the majority of terrain is less flat than it.
You fail. And you fail twice at not being able to spot a deliberately silly illustrative example.
Logged
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.
?

Proleg

Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #9 on: September 16, 2009, 05:57:53 PM »
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on September 16, 2009, 03:11:58 PM
A plain is, by definition, an aberration in terrain as the majority of terrain is less flat than it.
So we both agree that the earth is relatively flat?
Logged
?

loki700

  • 98
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2009, 06:36:02 PM »
Quote from: Proleg on September 16, 2009, 05:57:53 PM
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on September 16, 2009, 03:11:58 PM
A plain is, by definition, an aberration in terrain as the majority of terrain is less flat than it.
So we both agree that the earth is relatively flat?
Congratulations you can twist someone's words to try to make it seem like they agree with you.  He was saying that plains are flat surfaces and though the surrounding areas of that plain may be relatively flat they are bumpier than the plain.  He was saying that flat plains are a change from the normal terrain.  I would have assumed that would be easy to understand.
Logged
?

Proleg

Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2009, 06:37:08 PM »
Quote from: Proleg on September 16, 2009, 05:57:53 PM
So we both agree that the earth is relatively flat?
Logged
?

loki700

  • 98
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #12 on: September 16, 2009, 06:40:34 PM »
I believe that is considered spamming, as you have already said that statement, and i'm sure he hasn't had a chance to read it.  I doubt my posting will get in his way of reading it.
Logged
?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #13 on: September 16, 2009, 06:45:42 PM »
Quote from: Proleg on September 16, 2009, 05:57:53 PM
So we both agree that a small part of the earths surface is relatively flat?

Good work though :thumbs up:
Logged
?

Proleg

Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #14 on: September 16, 2009, 06:48:57 PM »
Quote from: loki700 on September 16, 2009, 06:40:34 PM
I believe that is considered spamming, as you have already said that statement, and i'm sure he hasn't had a chance to read it.  I doubt my posting will get in his way of reading it.
It was for your sake that I reposted it. I assumed you missed our exchange because you posted the same thing he did.

Do you not agree that the earth is relatively flat?
Logged
?

loki700

  • 98
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #15 on: September 16, 2009, 06:57:05 PM »
Quote from: Proleg on September 16, 2009, 06:48:57 PM
Quote from: loki700 on September 16, 2009, 06:40:34 PM
I believe that is considered spamming, as you have already said that statement, and i'm sure he hasn't had a chance to read it.  I doubt my posting will get in his way of reading it.
It was for your sake that I reposted it. I assumed you missed our exchange because you posted the same thing he did.

Do you not agree that the earth is relatively flat?
No i saw your exchange, and i did not say what he said.  I was saying that plains are change in the normal terrain, or as he said an aberration.  He was not saying that the entire earth is flat, he was not saying the entire earth is relatively flat, he was saying the surroundings of plains are flat-ish but are still bumpy, where as plains are flatter than the surroundings.  However, if you had a plain that extended 6-12 miles it would look flat from your point of view, however you could easily do tests to show it is not really flat, and it is only because the sphere we are on is so big.  Actually it's not a sphere per se, it's sphere-ish, to say it is a perfect sphere would be foolish.
Logged
?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3125
  • +0/-0
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #16 on: September 17, 2009, 09:41:34 AM »
Loki 1, Proleg nil.
New balls please.
Logged
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.
?

Areweonfiya

  • 2686
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #17 on: September 17, 2009, 04:21:38 PM »
Quote from: shades on September 16, 2009, 12:51:01 PM
Why did FET get created? What is wrong with RET? Are there inconsistencies? Are there flaws?

I don't want blanket statements here like: "RET is wrong because the earth is flat." Or "It makes you make stupid assumptions that don't make sense."

I want actual evidence that suggests RET is incorrect.

The thing about FET is that its more "this can work too" than "this (RET) doesn't work"
Logged
*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #18 on: September 17, 2009, 04:58:41 PM »
Quote from: Areweonfiya on September 17, 2009, 04:21:38 PM
The thing about FET is that its more "this can work too" than "this (RET) doesn't work"

I'm encouraged that you might be on the verge of an epiphany.
Logged
Quote from: wise on August 21, 2018, 11:47:45 PM
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?
*

W

  • 2288
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #19 on: September 17, 2009, 05:16:52 PM »
Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on September 17, 2009, 04:58:41 PM
Quote from: Areweonfiya on September 17, 2009, 04:21:38 PM
The thing about FET is that its more "this can work too" than "this (RET) doesn't work"

I'm encouraged that you might be on the verge of an epiphany.

Really? Is there actually hope for Areweonfiya?

I like to think there is a little bit of hope for everyone on this flat earth of ours.
Logged
Quote from: SSSavio on July 30, 2009, 05:29:51 AM
If you say that the earth is flat, you are destroying centuries of evolution.
*

shades

  • 175
  • +0/-0
  • Occam's Razor is not BS. Let's move on.
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #20 on: September 17, 2009, 05:18:38 PM »
Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on September 17, 2009, 04:58:41 PM
Quote from: Areweonfiya on September 17, 2009, 04:21:38 PM
The thing about FET is that its more "this can work too" than "this (RET) doesn't work"

I'm encouraged that you might be on the verge of an epiphany.

Hey you're a flat earther, right? Since none of the others have, can you answer my question?

Note I'm not demanding you answer my question, therefore not being an entitled brat. You don't have to.
Logged
Quote from: W on September 17, 2009, 06:09:43 PM
It's not spam, it's my catchphrase!
?

Areweonfiya

  • 2686
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #21 on: September 17, 2009, 05:57:24 PM »
I meant that YOU believe fet works, but you fail to actually DISPROVE round earth. It's like this
You say an atom is somthing that consists of electrons protons neutrons ect ect.

I say I think atoms are made of magic sugar and i will conduct experiments to prove my point, but i pay no regard to the theory at hand, I simply say this works instead of that.
Logged
*

W

  • 2288
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #22 on: September 17, 2009, 05:58:07 PM »
The earth has been proven to be flat, therefore it is not a sphere. In proving FET we disprove RET by simple logic.
Logged
Quote from: SSSavio on July 30, 2009, 05:29:51 AM
If you say that the earth is flat, you are destroying centuries of evolution.
*

bl4ke360

  • 399
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #23 on: September 17, 2009, 05:59:15 PM »
Quote from: W on September 17, 2009, 05:58:07 PM
The earth has been proven to be flat, therefore it is not a sphere. In proving FET we disprove RET by simple logic.

You have no idea what constitutes proof in the scientific community.
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Oh, for God's sake... ::)
Look out your window.
Quote from: Bl4ke360
http://i33.tinypic.com/350t5s8.jpg

Is this supposed to prove something here?
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Looks pretty flat to me.
*

W

  • 2288
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #24 on: September 17, 2009, 06:00:37 PM »
Quote from: bl4ke360 on September 17, 2009, 05:59:15 PM
You have no idea what constitutes proof in the scientific community.

Then what does constitute proof in the scientific community?
Logged
Quote from: SSSavio on July 30, 2009, 05:29:51 AM
If you say that the earth is flat, you are destroying centuries of evolution.
?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #25 on: September 17, 2009, 06:01:29 PM »
Quote from: W on September 17, 2009, 06:00:37 PM
Quote from: bl4ke360 on September 17, 2009, 05:59:15 PM
You have no idea what constitutes proof in the scientific community.

Then what does constitute proof in the scientific community?

Anything that doesn't have the words "Earth not a globe" or "Samuel Rowbotham" in it.

No Srsly.
Logged
*

bl4ke360

  • 399
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #26 on: September 17, 2009, 06:02:20 PM »
Quote from: W on September 17, 2009, 06:00:37 PM
Quote from: bl4ke360 on September 17, 2009, 05:59:15 PM
You have no idea what constitutes proof in the scientific community.

Then what does constitute proof in the scientific community?

See, you just admitted it right there.
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Oh, for God's sake... ::)
Look out your window.
Quote from: Bl4ke360
http://i33.tinypic.com/350t5s8.jpg

Is this supposed to prove something here?
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Looks pretty flat to me.
?

Areweonfiya

  • 2686
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #27 on: September 17, 2009, 06:02:42 PM »
*facepalm*
Logged
?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3125
  • +0/-0
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #28 on: September 17, 2009, 06:03:16 PM »
Quote from: W on September 17, 2009, 05:58:07 PM
The earth has been proven to be flat, therefore it is not a sphere. In proving FET we disprove RET by simple logic.

Name anything other than the works of Rowbottom (which you yourself have stated are irrelevant to your belief) which proves (and I mean proves as in negates the possibility of roundness also being true) that the earth is flat.
Logged
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.
*

bl4ke360

  • 399
  • +0/-0
Re: RET, what is wrong with it?
« Reply #29 on: September 17, 2009, 06:04:22 PM »
Quote from: Thermal Detonator on September 17, 2009, 06:03:16 PM
Quote from: W on September 17, 2009, 05:58:07 PM
The earth has been proven to be flat, therefore it is not a sphere. In proving FET we disprove RET by simple logic.

Name anything other than the works of Rowbottom (which you yourself have stated are irrelevant to your belief) which proves (and I mean proves as in negates the possibility of roundness also being true) that the earth is flat.

He already did by looking out his window and jumping off his chair.
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Oh, for God's sake... ::)
Look out your window.
Quote from: Bl4ke360
http://i33.tinypic.com/350t5s8.jpg

Is this supposed to prove something here?
Quote from: Tom Bishop
Looks pretty flat to me.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »