FET Concepts

  • 15 Replies
  • 5304 Views
*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3331
FET Concepts
« on: May 06, 2012, 05:59:59 PM »
I am working on a list of concepts that represent pillars of FET as they compare with RET. It is just the start of what will be a long list and other members can add to the list, also.

1). The Earth is flat according to religious weltanschauung:

There are some in FET that make a compelling case for FET inclusion in the texts of Holy Books. This pillar is not about individual belief in faith, agnosticism, or atheism. The issue is that the Earth is flat when viewed from the perspective of religious weltanschauung.

2). The Earth is historically flat.

Take a good look at a FET/RET timeline. RET is only a recent entry into the long historical Earth shape record that was not in need of said recent entry.

3). The Earth is logically flat:

The first thing learned in the training of future scientists is that there is no truth in science. Hypothesis testing is offered as the best tool for determining a reality and that the process can not resolve in a definitive conclusion.  FET has truth. RET does not. Can mathematics come to the rescue of RET? No, is the correct answer. You can spend all day or a lifetime factoring equations to show that a ball is mathematically rounded. This has no relevance to Earth shape. It is a classroom dynamic, only.

The same RET is translated into all languages, printed in books and distributed throughout all countries. The infamous globe toys are evident in (probably) all countries, as well. Add a couple videos and pictures that are used over and over and that’s about it for the story of RET.  What is missing from that story is any actual proof of the claims made. 


4). The Earth is legally flat.

The evidence for FET rises to a level far exceeding that in RET. In a court of law, FET advocates prove a true Earth shape beyond any reasonable doubt. RET can maybe rise to the level of reasonable suspicion at best (see #3). The subsequent levels of probable cause and preponderance of evidence are unattainable within the framework of RET, unlike that of FET.  Therefore, FET sets legal precedence in Earth shape reality.

*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 623
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #1 on: May 06, 2012, 06:18:28 PM »
Brother Gotham, Continue good sir.  I look forward to the reading of your works.

*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 623
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2012, 06:24:17 PM »
With regard to science,

It is known that science has and always will pander to the political motivations of its funders.  There is no doubt that we must look past the jaded fortress that is in the way of forward progress.  Science must be used without flounder without lost knowledge, away from the socratic monarchy that stalls its path in the gain of bread for the table.

*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3331
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2012, 06:29:30 PM »
Brother bullhorn, so good to hear from you. Thank you for your words of wisdom here and I do look forward to the continued work with your study.

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35370
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2012, 07:16:53 PM »
Your study myst continue, Brother bullhorn!

Seriously, I do find it a very fascinating read.  Do I agree with all of it, no, but I'm always interested to see where you go with it.  Don't let the angry minority here drive you off.

Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2012, 07:58:36 AM »
I am working on a list of concepts that represent pillars of FET as they compare with RET. It is just the start of what will be a long list and other members can add to the list, also.

1). The Earth is flat according to religious weltanschauung:

There are some in FET that make a compelling case for FET inclusion in the texts of Holy Books. This pillar is not about individual belief in faith, agnosticism, or atheism. The issue is that the Earth is flat when viewed from the perspective of religious weltanschauung.

2). The Earth is historically flat.

Take a good look at a FET/RET timeline. RET is only a recent entry into the long historical Earth shape record that was not in need of said recent entry.

3). The Earth is logically flat:

The first thing learned in the training of future scientists is that there is no truth in science. Hypothesis testing is offered as the best tool for determining a reality and that the process can not resolve in a definitive conclusion.  FET has truth. RET does not. Can mathematics come to the rescue of RET? No, is the correct answer. You can spend all day or a lifetime factoring equations to show that a ball is mathematically rounded. This has no relevance to Earth shape. It is a classroom dynamic, only.

The same RET is translated into all languages, printed in books and distributed throughout all countries. The infamous globe toys are evident in (probably) all countries, as well. Add a couple videos and pictures that are used over and over and that’s about it for the story of RET.  What is missing from that story is any actual proof of the claims made. 


4). The Earth is legally flat.

The evidence for FET rises to a level far exceeding that in RET. In a court of law, FET advocates prove a true Earth shape beyond any reasonable doubt. RET can maybe rise to the level of reasonable suspicion at best (see #3). The subsequent levels of probable cause and preponderance of evidence are unattainable within the framework of RET, unlike that of FET.  Therefore, FET sets legal precedence in Earth shape reality.

1) Earth is flat according to some fundamentalists; FET isn't common belief in Christianism.

2) Being wrong for a longer period of time isn't superior to being right for a shoerter period of time.

3) The Earth is logically round: if you put all the elements that modern science gives us, it cannot be anything that logically round.

4) Legally, the Earth can be whichever shape you choose it to be, even at the expense of your syllogism.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2012, 08:23:56 AM »
An excellent project Brother gotham. A sub-point I think you could add is that FET finds its evidence on Earth, unlike RET which has to construct an entire cosmological framework in order to support the very foundations of its hypothesis.
"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

*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3331
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2012, 05:31:45 PM »
An excellent project Brother gotham. A sub-point I think you could add is that FET finds its evidence on Earth, unlike RET which has to construct an entire cosmological framework in order to support the very foundations of its hypothesis.

Much appreciated Brother Wilmore and your sub-point is very astute.  It is a very important addition to the landscape supporting FET superiority.     

Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2012, 12:20:17 AM »
An excellent project Brother gotham. A sub-point I think you could add is that FET finds its evidence on Earth, unlike RET which has to construct an entire cosmological framework in order to support the very foundations of its hypothesis.

Much appreciated Brother Wilmore and your sub-point is very astute.  It is a very important addition to the landscape supporting FET superiority.   

The only evidence you can give is based from an old book which experriments cannont and are not reproducible today.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2012, 06:34:15 PM »
The earth is empirically, demonstrably flat.

This is a category.
"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

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35370
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2012, 06:46:30 PM »
An excellent project Brother gotham. A sub-point I think you could add is that FET finds its evidence on Earth, unlike RET which has to construct an entire cosmological framework in order to support the very foundations of its hypothesis.

Much appreciated Brother Wilmore and your sub-point is very astute.  It is a very important addition to the landscape supporting FET superiority.   

The only evidence you can give is based from an old book which experriments cannont and are not reproducible today.

Ah, the old "truth has an expiration date" line.

Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #11 on: May 09, 2012, 12:22:15 AM »
An excellent project Brother gotham. A sub-point I think you could add is that FET finds its evidence on Earth, unlike RET which has to construct an entire cosmological framework in order to support the very foundations of its hypothesis.

Much appreciated Brother Wilmore and your sub-point is very astute.  It is a very important addition to the landscape supporting FET superiority.   

The only evidence you can give is based from an old book which experriments cannont and are not reproducible today.

Ah, the old "truth has an expiration date" line.

How conveniently do you forget that the experiments cannot be reproduiced!

And your about comment: old lies can be easily debunked by modern science.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #12 on: May 09, 2012, 05:40:41 AM »
3). The Earth is logically flat:

The first thing learned in the training of future scientists is that there is no truth in science. Hypothesis testing is offered as the best tool for determining a reality and that the process can not resolve in a definitive conclusion.  FET has truth. RET does not. Can mathematics come to the rescue of RET? No, is the correct answer. You can spend all day or a lifetime factoring equations to show that a ball is mathematically rounded. This has no relevance to Earth shape. It is a classroom dynamic, only.

OK, where to start with this one.

1. Mathematics is used as a tool with science, for modelling and prediction.  It does not wildly "come to the rescue" like batman.  BTW I have never seen mathematical modelling in FET.

2. Science is honest about not be the final "truth", unlike FET that offers multiple explanations, depending on who you ask (thinking of James/Tom/JohnD, etc).

3. Logically, FET cannot possibly have "truth" because we to not have complete infinitesimal evidence from the whole of reality. If FET purports to be truth, it's either lying or should be reclassified as religion.  That is the real truth.
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

ozmax

  • 44
  • bhut seks
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #13 on: May 09, 2012, 07:19:37 AM »
The earth is empirically, demonstrably flat.
Do you have evidence to support this outlandish claim?
advocate of simulated commiseration

*

gotham

  • Planar Moderator
  • 3331
Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2012, 04:57:10 PM »
The earth is empirically, demonstrably flat.
Do you have evidence to support this outlandish claim?

Actually, Brother James has added a very important and supported FET position and that is appreciated. So significant that it will be more suited to be #1 on the list.   

Re: FET Concepts
« Reply #15 on: May 11, 2012, 09:59:00 PM »
I am working on a list of concepts that represent pillars of FET as they compare with RET. It is just the start of what will be a long list and other members can add to the list, also.

1). The Earth is flat according to religious weltanschauung:

There are some in FET that make a compelling case for FET inclusion in the texts of Holy Books. This pillar is not about individual belief in faith, agnosticism, or atheism. The issue is that the Earth is flat when viewed from the perspective of religious weltanschauung.

2). The Earth is historically flat.

Take a good look at a FET/RET timeline. RET is only a recent entry into the long historical Earth shape record that was not in need of said recent entry.

3). The Earth is logically flat:

The first thing learned in the training of future scientists is that there is no truth in science. Hypothesis testing is offered as the best tool for determining a reality and that the process can not resolve in a definitive conclusion.  FET has truth. RET does not. Can mathematics come to the rescue of RET? No, is the correct answer. You can spend all day or a lifetime factoring equations to show that a ball is mathematically rounded. This has no relevance to Earth shape. It is a classroom dynamic, only.

The same RET is translated into all languages, printed in books and distributed throughout all countries. The infamous globe toys are evident in (probably) all countries, as well. Add a couple videos and pictures that are used over and over and that’s about it for the story of RET.  What is missing from that story is any actual proof of the claims made. 


4). The Earth is legally flat.

The evidence for FET rises to a level far exceeding that in RET. In a court of law, FET advocates prove a true Earth shape beyond any reasonable doubt. RET can maybe rise to the level of reasonable suspicion at best (see #3). The subsequent levels of probable cause and preponderance of evidence are unattainable within the framework of RET, unlike that of FET.  Therefore, FET sets legal precedence in Earth shape reality.

1) Earth is flat according to some fundamentalists; FET isn't common belief in Christianism.

2) Being wrong for a longer period of time isn't superior to being right for a shoerter period of time.

3) The Earth is logically round: if you put all the elements that modern science gives us, it cannot be anything that logically round.

4) Legally, the Earth can be whichever shape you choose it to be, even at the expense of your syllogism.

This guy is right.

If you use modern science, the only obvious conclusion is that earth is flat.

If you use out dated science and a lot of bias, you can come up to any conclusion you feel like.