Any FEer think of publishing an official paper or something?

Has any FEer thought about making an official argument for such a theory and submitting it to the scientific community?  At the risk of sounding rude, scientists would probably laugh at it, but that's for a good reason.

Why would we submit evidence to be reviewed in line with a methodology we explicitly reject? It would be gross hypocrisy.

Why would we submit evidence to be reviewed in line with a methodology we explicitly reject? It would be gross hypocrisy.

I know the answer to this one, because it would be shot down so quickly the paper wouldn't have cooled down from the printer.

just try, a failed method does not always make you fail

just try, a failed method does not always make you fail

Our arguments cannot be made in line with their method, and thus automatically fail to satisfy their criteria. If we do not use the scientific method in our arguments, they will not be accepted by scientific journals.

what do you mean? you have posted all the steps right?

what do you mean? you have posted all the steps right?

They use the Zetetic Method. No scientific journal in their right mind would post something they have presented.

they show observation, some experimentation, hypothesises, and analysis and conclusions, is that not in scientific method?

they show observation, some experimentation, hypothesises, and analysis and conclusions, is that not in scientific method?

Wilmore will tell you the scientific method is flawed. Where is experimentation or analysis in, "I look out my window and see that the Earth looks flat, therefore the Earth is flat"?

Quote from: vhu9644 on December 07, 2010, 06:23:26 PM

they show observation, some experimentation, hypothesises, and analysis and conclusions, is that not in scientific method?

Wilmore will tell you the scientific method is flawed. Where is experimentation or analysis in, "I look out my window and see that the Earth looks flat, therefore the Earth is flat"?

didnt they do some thought experiments?

Why would we submit evidence to be reviewed in line with a methodology we explicitly reject? It would be gross hypocrisy.

Not all FE'ers reject the scientific method.

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on December 07, 2010, 06:02:45 PM

Why would we submit evidence to be reviewed in line with a methodology we explicitly reject? It would be gross hypocrisy.

Not all FE'ers reject the scientific method.

And not all who reject the scientific method are FEers.

I have published a large amount of research in the Flat Earth Believer's forum.

I have published a large amount of research in the Flat Earth Believer's forum.

Scientific community James, scientific community.

As much as I'd love to see a proper paper written about it, it wouldn't get past the peer review.  It's doubtful anyone in the scientific community would even read it if the author(s) don't hold a degree in the subject (Geology would be best, in this case).

Nevertheless, it is surely worth writing one and hosting it on this site.  A proper paper is worth far more than rambling forum posts and pages of arguments.  Certainly, it would be interesting to read, and may help FET to gather a (generally) accepted theory.

I have published a large amount of research in the Flat Earth Believer's forum Crank's Meeting Place.

Fixed.

Quote from: James on December 07, 2010, 08:20:01 PM

I have published a large amount of research baseless speculation in the Flat Earth Believer's forum Crank's Meeting Place.

Fixed.

Fixed again.

Quote from: Thermal Detonator on December 11, 2010, 06:07:59 AM

Quote from: James on December 07, 2010, 08:20:01 PM

I have published a large amount a smaller volume than Levee of research baseless speculation in the Flat Earth Believer's forum Crank's Meeting Place.

Fixed.

Fixed again.

Fixed thrice.

Guys, keep low-content posting out of the upper boards. Come on, you know better.

Guys, keep low-content posting out of the upper boards. Come on, you know better.

Awww, I've been away for months, let me play a little. At least I refrained from using a prefix on James's name.

Awww, I've been away for months, let me play a little.

That's what RM is for.

Quote from: James on December 07, 2010, 08:20:01 PM

I have published a large amount of research in the Flat Earth Believer's forum.

Scientific community James, scientific community.

the present day "scientific community" is small. so many controlled by the NWO that im guessing alot of what u see it just garbage with little science like the global warming hoax

Quote from: sillyrob on December 07, 2010, 08:23:36 PM

Quote from: James on December 07, 2010, 08:20:01 PM

I have published a large amount of research in the Flat Earth Believer's forum.

Scientific community James, scientific community.

the present day "scientific community" is small. so many controlled by the NWO that im guessing alot of what u see it just garbage with little science like the global warming hoax

proof?

Quote from: sillyrob on December 07, 2010, 08:23:36 PM

Quote from: James on December 07, 2010, 08:20:01 PM

I have published a large amount of research in the Flat Earth Believer's forum.

Scientific community James, scientific community.

the present day "scientific community" is small. so many controlled by the NWO that im guessing alot of what u see it just garbage with little science like the global warming hoax

Talk to the Inuit.

Berny
No really - the Inuit are justifiably worried.

Quote from: Gigamonsta on December 13, 2010, 09:07:50 PM

Quote from: sillyrob on December 07, 2010, 08:23:36 PM

Quote from: James on December 07, 2010, 08:20:01 PM

I have published a large amount of research in the Flat Earth Believer's forum.

Scientific community James, scientific community.

the present day "scientific community" is small. so many controlled by the NWO that im guessing alot of what u see it just garbage with little science like the global warming hoax

proof?

google "climate-gate"!!!!

Quote from: Beorn on December 13, 2010, 09:19:41 PM

Quote from: Gigamonsta on December 13, 2010, 09:07:50 PM

Quote from: sillyrob on December 07, 2010, 08:23:36 PM

Quote from: James on December 07, 2010, 08:20:01 PM

I have published a large amount of research in the Flat Earth Believer's forum.

Scientific community James, scientific community.

the present day "scientific community" is small. so many controlled by the NWO that im guessing alot of what u see it just garbage with little science like the global warming hoax

proof?

google "climate-gate"!!!!

So how does that proof that a lot of what you see is just garbage? Or that the present day "scientific community" (why the ""?) is small.
I don't have time to look closer into it, but 2 articles found googling: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jul/07/climategate-review-clears-scientists-dishonesty and http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/31/climate-mails-inquiry-jones-cleared clearly state that the global warming isn't a hoax, even though those scientists might have had some wrong email conversations.

Evolution, the big bang, global warming, gravity, GPS, radio carbon dating, cancer, AIDS: all hoaxes.  The truth is everything is made out of four elements and the human body was made by God and is made of four humours

Talk to the Inuit.

Berny
No really - the Inuit are justifiably worried.

They are also concerned that their astronomical observations no longer match that of their history which no one is taking seriously.

Scientists are not interested in changing their world view. If you want to be in the industry, you cannot challenge established beliefs. If you do, they just won't publish your paper and their religious scientific beliefs are taught to our kids in schools. What has happened to our country?

Scientists are not interested in changing their world view.

You're kidding, right?  Scientists just love to turn their world view on end.  It's just that you need to have a very convincing argument (and some pretty solid data helps) in order to get scientists to change their world view.