« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?

  • 22 Replies
  • 6877 Views
?

mightychef

  • 21
  • +0/-0
if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« on: June 02, 2011, 11:23:25 AM »
Here's how I see it.

The general consensus is that the world is more or less spherical. There is a certain population, however, which believes that it is not. Rather, that it is more or less disk-shaped.

However, the people who believe that it is disk shaped really have no idea what shape it is. They just believe that it is *not spherical*. I don't know why they believe that it isn't generally a sphere, but the reasons aren't always the same. Conspiracy theory and alternative ideas about physics are offered as explanations for the reason that things are not as they appear.

However, if we are going to throw physics out the window - why settle for a disk-shaped earth? Why not a hyper-sphere, or some other unusual shape. Is earth really any more likely to be a flat disk than it is a hyper-sphere? If we disagree with physics as presented to us, then why settle for a physical system consistent with earth-as-a-disk when there are so many other options?
Logged
*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2011, 11:41:00 AM »
We must settle for a Flat Earth because we've proven that the earth is flat.

See: Earth Not a Globe.
Logged
?

mightychef

  • 21
  • +0/-0
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2011, 11:41:57 AM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 02, 2011, 11:41:00 AM
We must settle for a Flat Earth because we've proven the earth is be flat.

See: Earth Not a Globe.

That's the whole thing though. Just because the earth is not a globe doesn't make it flat. Why not a hyper-sphere? or a hyper-cube, or any other shape?
Logged
?

crackpipe larry

  • 178
  • +0/-0
  • I poopded.. <%!
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #3 on: June 02, 2011, 11:44:50 AM »
Wait, They now have a "better" forum for your kind:

www.hypersphere-believers.com//trl.dpt
Logged
Why are Pandas so rare??   cuz, Panda tastes good.. <is>
?

mightychef

  • 21
  • +0/-0
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #4 on: June 02, 2011, 11:54:53 AM »
the whole thing? my god. so painful.

edit: also - ZA says that he is proving the earth a plane, but then forms all of his arguments like thus:

-assume the earth is a globe
-[experiments and stuff]
-aha! it cannot be!

this is more of the form of a disproof of globe than a proof of flatness. in fact, if you really disbelieve in roundness for the reasons as presented in ZA, then you should equally not believe in FE. FE is just a convenient model that seemed to fit with his calculations, just like RE was a convenient model that fit traditional astronomical calculation, which is precisely why he rejected it.

All ZA really does attempts to prove is *not sphere*.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2011, 12:00:28 PM by mightychef »
Logged
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12086
  • +3/-3
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #5 on: June 02, 2011, 03:55:33 PM »
Quote from: mightychef on June 02, 2011, 11:54:53 AM
All ZA really does attempts to prove is *not sphere*.


No, Rowbotham "attempts to prove" that the Earth's surface is not curved. Ergo, it is flat.
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
?

Around And About

  • 2606
  • +0/-0
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #6 on: June 02, 2011, 07:25:27 PM »
I think the point is that the premise of ENaG is not to ascertain the shape of the world through Zetetic inquiry but rather to disprove the idea that it is round, which smacks of confirmation bias for a pre-existing notion. This directly contradicts the "No Hypothesis" rule of the philosophy. That's probably why the book is called what it is and not, for example, "What Shape is the Earth?" or even "The Earth is Actually Flat".

To me, Rowbotham seemed much more interested in disproving the opposition rather than defending his position. Although in practice this amounts to the same thing (because I think it would have to be either a conventional plane or a sphere, sorry OP), it reminds me of that logical fallacy Creationists favor so much, wherein they argue against their opposition in order to seemingly validate their position while not actually providing any real defense of their own. (e.g. "Big Bang cannot be true because yada yada, therefore God is real")
Logged
Quote from: New Earth on January 16, 2012, 12:37:41 AM
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.
?

Mr Pseudonym

  • Official Member
  • 5421
  • +0/-0
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #7 on: June 02, 2011, 07:33:27 PM »
Quote from: mightychef on June 02, 2011, 11:23:25 AM
However, if we are going to throw physics out the window - why settle for a disk-shaped earth? Why not a hyper-sphere, or some other unusual shape. Is earth really any more likely to be a flat disk than it is a hyper-sphere? If we disagree with physics as presented to us, then why settle for a physical system consistent with earth-as-a-disk when there are so many other options?
You mentioned everything except a cube shaped earth.  Congratulations.
Logged
Quote from: hallsofvallhalla on July 07, 2010, 01:06:43 PM
Why do we fall back to earth? Because our weight pushes us down, no laws, no gravity pulling us. It is the law of intelligence.
?

mightychef

  • 21
  • +0/-0
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2011, 10:43:08 PM »
Quote from: Mr Pseudonym on June 02, 2011, 07:33:27 PM
Quote from: mightychef on June 02, 2011, 11:23:25 AM
However, if we are going to throw physics out the window - why settle for a disk-shaped earth? Why not a hyper-sphere, or some other unusual shape. Is earth really any more likely to be a flat disk than it is a hyper-sphere? If we disagree with physics as presented to us, then why settle for a physical system consistent with earth-as-a-disk when there are so many other options?
You mentioned everything except a cube shaped earth.  Congratulations.

I meant for the cube to be listed in the so-many-other-options section. Anyway, I would swallow hyper-geometry as a much more probable answer over flat earth + conspiracy theory.
Logged
?

mightychef

  • 21
  • +0/-0
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #9 on: June 02, 2011, 10:46:09 PM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on June 02, 2011, 03:55:33 PM
Quote from: mightychef on June 02, 2011, 11:54:53 AM
All ZA really does attempts to prove is *not sphere*.


No, Rowbotham "attempts to prove" that the Earth's surface is not curved. Ergo, it is flat.

If you inspect your logic, can you really accept it as is? Not curved may have left flat as the only conceivable option for Rowbotham, but I doubt that he considered all other possibilities.
Logged
?

11cookeaw1

Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #10 on: June 03, 2011, 03:10:09 AM »
Quote from: mightychef on June 02, 2011, 11:41:57 AM
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 02, 2011, 11:41:00 AM
We must settle for a Flat Earth because we've proven the earth is be flat.

See: Earth Not a Globe.

That's the whole thing though. Just because the earth is not a globe doesn't make it flat. Why not a hyper-sphere? or a hyper-cube, or any other shape?

or a time cube...
Logged
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12086
  • +3/-3
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2011, 06:31:03 AM »
Quote from: mightychef on June 02, 2011, 10:46:09 PM
If you inspect your logic, can you really accept it as is? Not curved may have left flat as the only conceivable option for Rowbotham, but I doubt that he considered all other possibilities.


Something that is not curved is, by definition, flat.
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
*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #12 on: June 03, 2011, 03:43:55 PM »
Quote from: mightychef on June 02, 2011, 11:41:57 AM
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 02, 2011, 11:41:00 AM
We must settle for a Flat Earth because we've proven the earth is be flat.

See: Earth Not a Globe.

That's the whole thing though. Just because the earth is not a globe doesn't make it flat. Why not a hyper-sphere? or a hyper-cube, or any other shape?

We didn't prove it to be "not a globe," we proved it to be flat.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2011, 04:01:19 PM by Tom Bishop »
Logged
*

three-dimensional-world

  • 770
  • +0/-0
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #13 on: June 05, 2011, 07:27:16 PM »
Quote from: mightychef on June 02, 2011, 11:23:25 AM

However, if we are going to throw physics out the window - why settle for a disk-shaped earth? Why not a hyper-sphere, or some other unusual shape. Is earth really any more likely to be a flat disk than it is a hyper-sphere?

 >:(

Im speechles.s.. dont know what to say

very angry about this
Logged
*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6758
  • +0/-0
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #14 on: June 05, 2011, 07:27:59 PM »
Logged
*

EnglshGentleman

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 9533
  • +0/-0
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #15 on: June 06, 2011, 05:17:25 PM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on June 03, 2011, 06:31:03 AM
Quote from: mightychef on June 02, 2011, 10:46:09 PM
If you inspect your logic, can you really accept it as is? Not curved may have left flat as the only conceivable option for Rowbotham, but I doubt that he considered all other possibilities.


Something that is not curved is, by definition, flat.

What???

This information is mind blowing! Paradigm changing even!
Logged
*

DDDDAts all folks

  • 1283
  • +0/-0
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #16 on: June 13, 2011, 10:20:08 PM »
Quote from: Lord Wilmore on June 03, 2011, 06:31:03 AM
Quote from: mightychef on June 02, 2011, 10:46:09 PM
If you inspect your logic, can you really accept it as is? Not curved may have left flat as the only conceivable option for Rowbotham, but I doubt that he considered all other possibilities.


Something that is not curved is, by definition, flat.

That's not necessarily true.
Logged
*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #17 on: June 14, 2011, 06:09:29 PM »
Quote from: DDDDAts all folks on June 13, 2011, 10:20:08 PM
Something that is not curved is, by definition, flat.

That's not necessarily true.
[/quote]

Interesting.  Counter-example?
Logged
Quote from: wise on August 21, 2018, 11:47:45 PM
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12204
  • +0/-2
  • Now available in stereo
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #18 on: June 14, 2011, 09:55:28 PM »
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
*

DDDDAts all folks

  • 1283
  • +0/-0
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #19 on: June 14, 2011, 10:50:47 PM »
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on June 14, 2011, 09:55:28 PM
Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 14, 2011, 06:09:29 PM
Interesting.  Counter-example?
A cube.

Not only that but you can be on a curved and flat surface at the same time.



Imagine walking on the sides and not the inner and outer edge. You are on a flat surface that is also curved within the other dimension.
Logged
*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #20 on: June 14, 2011, 11:30:02 PM »
Quote from: DDDDAts all folks on June 14, 2011, 10:50:47 PM
Quote from: PizzaPlanet on June 14, 2011, 09:55:28 PM
Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 14, 2011, 06:09:29 PM
Interesting.  Counter-example?
A cube.

Not only that but you can be on a curved and flat surface at the same time.



Imagine walking on the sides and not the inner and outer edge. You are on a flat surface that is also curved within the other dimension.

Cubes are flat.

And that image is clearly curved, meaning it does not meet the qualification "not curved" and is therefore irrelevant.
Logged
Quote from: wise on August 21, 2018, 11:47:45 PM
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45160
  • +98/-136
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #21 on: June 15, 2011, 11:45:47 AM »
Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 14, 2011, 06:09:29 PM
Interesting.  Counter-example?

Many polyhedrons have flat surfaces, but are overall roughly spherical.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyhedron
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.
*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12204
  • +0/-2
  • Now available in stereo
Re: if we are going to throw conventional physics out the window, why settle for FE?
« Reply #22 on: June 15, 2011, 12:48:43 PM »
Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on June 14, 2011, 11:30:02 PM
Cubes are flat.
Hello and welcome to the Flat Cube Society. Our host today is Roundy!
Logged
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »