[REDACTED]

  • 133 Replies
  • 27216 Views
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #90 on: August 09, 2010, 04:41:37 PM »
As a Flat Earth Believer I can only say that the Truth always has and will prevail.
I understand at last. That's why FET hasn't gained any considerable support in the history of the mankind. It isn't the Truth.
Any considerable support?  In the history of mankind?  I suggest you check your facts.
I checked.

For a long time people supported flat earth belief, both "scientifically" as well as religiously.  Most major religions are flat earth religions.

Are you frakking serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth well over 2,000 years ago.

You're frakking insane.
"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible."

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #91 on: August 09, 2010, 04:43:47 PM »
Quote
For a long time people supported flat earth belief, both "scientifically" as well as religiously.  Most major religions are flat earth religions.

Are you frakking serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth well over 2,000 years ago.

You're frakking insane.

I fail to see the relevance.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #92 on: August 09, 2010, 04:49:12 PM »
Quote
For a long time people supported flat earth belief, both "scientifically" as well as religiously.  Most major religions are flat earth religions.

Are you frakking serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth well over 2,000 years ago.

You're frakking insane.

I fail to see the relevance.

It disproves his claim that people supported the flat earth belief for a long time.

It doesn't matter what the early humans thought hundreds of thousands of years ago, since that was long before the development of any major religions and certainly long before the development of science as we would recognize it.
"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible."

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #93 on: August 09, 2010, 04:51:18 PM »
Quote
For a long time people supported flat earth belief, both "scientifically" as well as religiously.  Most major religions are flat earth religions.

Are you frakking serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth well over 2,000 years ago.

You're frakking insane.

I fail to see the relevance.

It disproves his claim that people supported the flat earth belief for a long time.

No it doesn't.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #94 on: August 09, 2010, 06:41:01 PM »
Quote
For a long time people supported flat earth belief, both "scientifically" as well as religiously.  Most major religions are flat earth religions.

Are you frakking serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth well over 2,000 years ago.

You're frakking insane.

I fail to see the relevance.

It disproves his claim that people supported the flat earth belief for a long time.

No it doesn't.

Ummm........yes, it does. Where the hell did you get your education?
"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible."

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #95 on: August 09, 2010, 09:46:08 PM »
Quote
For a long time people supported flat earth belief, both "scientifically" as well as religiously.  Most major religions are flat earth religions.

Are you frakking serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth well over 2,000 years ago.

You're frakking insane.

I fail to see the relevance.

It disproves his claim that people supported the flat earth belief for a long time.

No it doesn't.

Ummm........yes, it does. Where the hell did you get your education?

No it doesn't.  Even if it had been proven that the Earth was round 2000 years ago it still wouldn't demonstrate that nobody has supported flat earth belief since it happened.  You're using ridiculously faulty logic here.

It's been proven pretty rigorously that the Earth is more than a few thousand years old.  Have you ever heard of Young Earth Creationism?
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #96 on: August 09, 2010, 09:59:11 PM »
Quote
For a long time people supported flat earth belief, both "scientifically" as well as religiously.  Most major religions are flat earth religions.

Are you frakking serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth well over 2,000 years ago.

You're frakking insane.

I fail to see the relevance.

It disproves his claim that people supported the flat earth belief for a long time.

No it doesn't.

Ummm........yes, it does. Where the hell did you get your education?

No it doesn't.  Even if it had been proven that the Earth was round 2000 years ago it still wouldn't demonstrate that nobody has supported flat earth belief since it happened.  You're using ridiculously faulty logic here.

It's been proven pretty rigorously that the Earth is more than a few thousand years old.  Have you ever heard of Young Earth Creationism?

Who the fuck is talking about Young Earth Creationism?

And, yes, it was proven that Earth was "round' well over 2000 years ago. If you think otherwise, I must request that you stop consuming so much valuable oxygen at once.

I never said that no one has supported flat Earth belief since, I'm sure some have, but I consider them to have been a useless part of humanity due to their laughable ignorance.
"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible."

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #97 on: August 09, 2010, 10:07:27 PM »
Who the fuck is talking about Young Earth Creationism?

It's a valid analogy.  There are still people who believe they can demonstrate scientifically that it's the case, and obviously it's supported religiously.

Quote
And, yes, it was proven that Earth was "round' well over 2000 years ago. If you think otherwise, I must request that you stop consuming so much valuable oxygen at once.

No, it wasn't "proven" round until relatively recently.  Eratosthenes did not prove that the Earth was round with his experiment, he more assumed it.

Quote
I never said that no one has supported flat Earth belief since, I'm sure some have, but I consider them to have been a useless part of humanity due to their laughable ignorance.

Well, whatever you think of them, that is exactly what you said earlier in this thread.  See:
It disproves his claim that people supported the flat earth belief for a long time.



« Last Edit: August 09, 2010, 10:09:46 PM by Roundy the Truthinessist »
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #98 on: August 10, 2010, 04:22:46 AM »
One minute FEers are bawwing that the RE belief has been foisted on society since time immemorial, the next their bawwing that FE belief has been held by major religions since time immemorial.

I wish you'd get your cool story straight.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #99 on: August 10, 2010, 05:29:09 AM »
One minute FEers are bawwing that the RE belief has been foisted on society since time immemorial, the next their bawwing that FE belief has been held by major religions since time immemorial.

I wish you'd get your cool story straight.

Are you saying that societies and religions must believe the same thing at the same time?
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.

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #100 on: August 10, 2010, 07:00:09 AM »
Are you saying that societies and religions must believe the same thing at the same time?

I'm saying JD's cool story is inconsistent. Especially in the provided historical context where religion dictated society.

?

Gigamonsta

  • 343
  • Earth Shape Agnostic (ESA) - QUESTION EVERYTHING
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #101 on: August 10, 2010, 10:21:16 AM »
Quote
For a long time people supported flat earth belief, both "scientifically" as well as religiously.  Most major religions are flat earth religions.

Are you frakking serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth well over 2,000 years ago.

You're frakking insane.

I fail to see the relevance.

It disproves his claim that people supported the flat earth belief for a long time.

No it doesn't.

Ummm........yes, it does. Where the hell did you get your education?

No it doesn't.  Even if it had been proven that the Earth was round 2000 years ago it still wouldn't demonstrate that nobody has supported flat earth belief since it happened.  You're using ridiculously faulty logic here.

It's been proven pretty rigorously that the Earth is more than a few thousand years old.  Have you ever heard of Young Earth Creationism?

Who the fuck is talking about Young Earth Creationism?

And, yes, it was proven that Earth was "round' well over 2000 years ago. If you think otherwise, I must request that you stop consuming so much valuable oxygen at once.

I never said that no one has supported flat Earth belief since, I'm sure some have, but I consider them to have been a useless part of humanity due to their laughable ignorance.

He also believed in the four elements of wind, water, fire and earth. Oh and that women were inferior to men. He sounds so brilliant to me thta Erastothenes. so this old greek fella basically is believed by you because he was old? How was it proved 2k years ago? did all the chinese, aztecs, and others all have access to this old greek guy as he was writing?! of course not!!!! he advanced a hypothesis which has yet to be proved

Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #102 on: August 10, 2010, 10:36:15 AM »
He also believed in the four elements of wind, water, fire and earth. Oh and that women were inferior to men. He sounds so brilliant to me thta Erastothenes. so this old greek fella basically is believed by you because he was old? How was it proved 2k years ago? did all the chinese, aztecs, and others all have access to this old greek guy as he was writing?! of course not!!!! he advanced a hypothesis which has yet to be proved
That would be an ad hominem fallacy.

The hypothesis that the Earth is a sphere is proven.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8902
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #103 on: August 10, 2010, 10:37:57 AM »
He also believed in the four elements of wind, water, fire and earth. Oh and that women were inferior to men. He sounds so brilliant to me thta Erastothenes. so this old greek fella basically is believed by you because he was old? How was it proved 2k years ago? did all the chinese, aztecs, and others all have access to this old greek guy as he was writing?! of course not!!!! he advanced a hypothesis which has yet to be proved
That would be an ad hominem fallacy.

The hypothesis that the Earth is a sphere is proven.
Prove it.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #104 on: August 10, 2010, 10:41:50 AM »
He also believed in the four elements of wind, water, fire and earth. Oh and that women were inferior to men. He sounds so brilliant to me thta Erastothenes. so this old greek fella basically is believed by you because he was old? How was it proved 2k years ago? did all the chinese, aztecs, and others all have access to this old greek guy as he was writing?! of course not!!!! he advanced a hypothesis which has yet to be proved
That would be an ad hominem fallacy.

The hypothesis that the Earth is a sphere is proven.
Prove it.
Sure. Here's one published work: http://gyanpedia.in/tft/Resources/books/earthpix.pdf.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #105 on: August 10, 2010, 11:49:42 AM »
Are you saying that societies and religions must believe the same thing at the same time?

I'm saying JD's cool story is inconsistent. Especially in the provided historical context where religion dictated society.

But not all ancient religions dictated scientific (or philosophical) knowledge.  The ancient Greek philosophers, for example, did just fine without having to invoke their gods to explain every natural event.
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.

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #106 on: August 10, 2010, 04:46:29 PM »
But not all ancient religions dictated scientific (or philosophical) knowledge.  The ancient Greek philosophers, for example, did just fine without having to invoke their gods to explain every natural event.

Probably true.

If you could show a case where Greek society contradicted Greek religion regarding the shape of the earth then you might be onto something.

Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #107 on: August 10, 2010, 05:07:27 PM »
Quote from: Username
Horentius is correct.

Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #108 on: August 10, 2010, 05:08:58 PM »
Sure. Here's one published work: http://gyanpedia.in/tft/Resources/books/earthpix.pdf.

Pretty nice...
Thanks. Asimov always did such a great job explaining science. I miss him.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8902
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #109 on: August 10, 2010, 05:27:19 PM »
Is that the best you have  ???
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #110 on: August 10, 2010, 05:36:19 PM »
Is that the best you have  ???
When did we say that? Are you paying attention? Does FET have anything from someone so well published and respected? RET has one of the top writers explaining how we know the Earth is round. FEers haven't presented any publication in support of FET. I guess you have nothing.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8902
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #111 on: August 10, 2010, 05:38:07 PM »
Is that the best you have  ???
FEers haven't presented any publication in support of FET. I guess you have nothing.
I'll give you a chance to reread that and realize your mistake.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #112 on: August 11, 2010, 12:19:57 AM »
Is that the best you have  ???
FEers haven't presented any publication in support of FET. I guess you have nothing.
I'll give you a chance to reread that and realize your mistake.
It's bother when all you get always is that "there is" and never anything real. Let's see from FE side any publication in same level that Asimov's was(Rowbotham book isn't). And as I realize that there isn't any meaning to ask any scientific papers from FE side(because there isn't any) then maybe we can lower the bar and ask something from Popular Science which makes sense. From the 20'th century other half(there isn't much use from historic papers which have totally outdated).
 Edit:
And rereading doesn't change anything. FEers haven't presented any publications in support of FET. Forum posts aren't publications.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2010, 01:51:08 AM by zork »
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #113 on: August 11, 2010, 11:56:15 AM »
Is that the best you have  ???

You got what you asked for. ???

?

seeb49

Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #114 on: September 26, 2010, 02:59:44 PM »
For the most part I agree with this post... Other than the theology analogy. That is highly stereotypical.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #115 on: October 03, 2010, 08:42:00 PM »
Quote
FEers haven't presented any publications in support of FET. Forum posts aren't publications.

I've had several references in my signature link for almost four years now.

For example; here is one from The English Mechanic on Flat Earth Theory:

"The Flat Earth: another Bedford Canal experiment" (Bernard H.Watson, et al),
ENGLISH MECHANIC, 80:160, 1904

Bedford Canal, England. A repeat of the 1870 experiment.
"A train of empty turf-boats had just entered the Canal from the river Ouse, and
was about proceeding to Ramsey. I arranged with the captain to place the shallowest
boat last in the train, and to take me on to Welney Bridge, a distance of six
miles. A good telescope was then fixed on the lowest part of the stern of the last
boat. The sluice gate of the Old Bedford Bridge was 5ft. 8in. high, the turf-boat
moored there was 2ft. 6in. high, and the notice board was 6ft. 6in. from the water.
The sun was shining strongly upon them in the direction of the south-southwest; the
air was exceedingly still and clear, and the surface of the water smooth as a
molten mirror, so that everything was favourable for observation. At 1.15 p.m. the
train started for Welney. As the boats gradually receded, the sluice gate, the
turf-boat and the notice board continued to be visible to the naked eye for about
four miles. When the sluice gate and the turf-boat (being of a dark colour) became
somewhat indistinct, the notice board (which was white) was still plainly visible,
and remained so to the end of six miles. But on looking through the telescope all
the objects were distinctly visible throughout the whole distance. On reaching
Welney Bridge I made very careful and repeated observations, and finding several
men upon the banks of the canal, I called them to look through the telescope. They
all saw distinctly the white notice board, the sluice gate, and the black turf-boat
moored near them.

Now, as the telescope was 18in. above the water, The line of sight would touch the
horizon at one mile and a half away (if the surface were convex). The curvature of
the remaining four miles and a half would be 13ft. 6in. Hence the turf-boat should
have been 11ft., the top of the sluice gate 7ft. 10in., and the bottom of the
notice board 7ft. below the horizon.

My recent experiment affords undeniable proof of the Earth's unglobularity, because
it rests not on transitory vision; but my proof remains printed on the negative of
the photograph which Mr.Clifton took for me, and in my presence, on behalf of
J.H.Dallmeyer, Ltd.
A photograph can not 'imagine' nor lie!".

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #116 on: October 03, 2010, 08:53:41 PM »
"The sun was shining strongly upon them in the direction of the south-southwest; the air was exceedingly still and clear, and the surface of the water smooth as a molten mirror, so that everything was favourable for observation."

Hmmm... It seems to me that Mr. Watson was describing ideal conditions for any number of atmospheric refractive phenomena (mirages, lofting, etc.).
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
  • 17920
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #117 on: October 03, 2010, 09:08:48 PM »
"The sun was shining strongly upon them in the direction of the south-southwest; the air was exceedingly still and clear, and the surface of the water smooth as a molten mirror, so that everything was favourable for observation."

Hmmm... It seems to me that Mr. Watson was describing ideal conditions for any number of atmospheric refractive phenomena (mirages, lofting, etc.).

It's funny how when confronted with one of the many experiments described in the Flat Earth Literature, or when confronted with a test which diametrically opposes RET, the Round Earther's sole and only rebuttal is "An illusion did it".

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #118 on: October 03, 2010, 09:14:34 PM »
"The sun was shining strongly upon them in the direction of the south-southwest; the air was exceedingly still and clear, and the surface of the water smooth as a molten mirror, so that everything was favourable for observation."

Hmmm... It seems to me that Mr. Watson was describing ideal conditions for any number of atmospheric refractive phenomena (mirages, lofting, etc.).

It's funny how when confronted with one of the many experiments described in the Flat Earth Literature, or when confronted with a test which diametrically opposes RET, the Round Earther's sole and only rebuttal is "An illusion did it".

It's funny how when confronted with one of the many experiments described in scientific journals, or when confronted with a test which diametrically opposes FET (such as the the sun setting), the FE'ers sole and only rebuttal is "An illusion did it."
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Why RE will never win here
« Reply #119 on: October 03, 2010, 10:30:50 PM »
"The sun was shining strongly upon them in the direction of the south-southwest; the air was exceedingly still and clear, and the surface of the water smooth as a molten mirror, so that everything was favourable for observation."

Hmmm... It seems to me that Mr. Watson was describing ideal conditions for any number of atmospheric refractive phenomena (mirages, lofting, etc.).

It's funny how when confronted with one of the many experiments described in the Flat Earth Literature, or when confronted with a test which diametrically opposes RET, the Round Earther's sole and only rebuttal is "An illusion did it".

Sorry Tom, but atmospheric refractive phenomena (mirages, etc.) are not illusions.  The are very real, very explainable and fairly common under the right conditions.
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.