Easy way out answers

Dark energy
Bendy light
Read Earth Not A Globe

I would say the easy way out is to follow the herd and say the earth is round without really thinking about it critically.
I would also warn you to be careful with low content posts. This is not the first post from you I have read with very little substance.

My intention was that you add some more answers. I have a degree in physics. I've studied astrophysics, thermodynamics, quantum physics, classical mechanics, astronomy, and a few more. I'd say I've put in more effort than the average flat earther.

My intention was that you add some more answers. I have a degree in physics. I've studied astrophysics, thermodynamics, quantum physics, classical mechanics, astronomy, and a few more. I'd say I've put in more effort than the average flat earther.

Awesome, you studied a whole heap of disciplines that are corrupted by globularist dogma on a constant basis. I'm not sure what 'effort' you are talking about either. Some people here have put a lot of effort into trying to spread the good news about FET.

Dark energy
Bendy light
Read Earth Not A Globe

RE cosmology: 
Hypothetical Dark Energy/Dark Matter consist of 96% of universe in order to reconcile observation to theory (heaven forbid we consider that the underlying assumptions of cosmology/cosmogony)
Galaxies older than the Universe
Everyone knows the world is round. (How dare you question scientific orthodoxy)

Effort would be learning and using the scientific method, making observations, tons of calculations. Pretty much the equivalent of learning a language and using it fluently. Whereas whatever goes on in a flat-earthers' "free-thinking" mind would be equal to baby talk.

I'm going to go for an answer you should well have posted by now and that really, truly, applies to you.

Lurk moar.

FEers reject the scientific method and the many inherent flaws found within.

Oh yeah. That's a good one.

Dark energy
Bendy light
Read Earth Not A Globe

dont forget a massive conspiracy.

And lack of funding.

This post is an insult to logic. Lampooning a real fact is a pathetic display of ignorance and immaturity. If it was up to me, I would close this thread for being useless, inflammatory, and uninformative. It doesn't even have the entertainment value of some of certain spherical narratives.

This post is an insult to logic.

Yeah, okay.

Lampooning a real fact is a pathetic display of ignorance and immaturity.

I agree, but I see no facts herein.

If it was up to me, I would close this thread for being useless, inflammatory, and uninformative. It doesn't even have the entertainment value of some of certain spherical narratives.

Haha, I smell a troll.

Haha, I smell a troll.

Apparently, the sense of smell is the only sense you make use of.  Indeed, it is the only sense you make, as well.

Quote from: burt on July 20, 2012, 09:20:57 PM

Haha, I smell a troll.

Apparently, the sense of smell is the only sense you make use of.  Indeed, it is the only sense you make, as well.

You didn't understand my post?

Quote from: Pyriew on July 21, 2012, 07:43:55 PM

Quote from: burt on July 20, 2012, 09:20:57 PM

Haha, I smell a troll.

Apparently, the sense of smell is the only sense you make use of.  Indeed, it is the only sense you make, as well.

You didn't understand my post?

Sorry if that went over your head.

Quote from: burt on July 24, 2012, 04:40:45 PM

Quote from: Pyriew on July 21, 2012, 07:43:55 PM

Quote from: burt on July 20, 2012, 09:20:57 PM

Haha, I smell a troll.

Apparently, the sense of smell is the only sense you make use of.  Indeed, it is the only sense you make, as well.

You didn't understand my post?

Sorry if that went over your head.

I assumed by your reply that it was my post that went over your head; I was inquiring as to the validity of my assumption. I was quite right it seems.

You forgot Celestial Gears.

Anyway, the issue isn't that these answers are easy and quick and that's all they have.  The issue is that it's been answered so many time in so many ways that they just don't care to type it up.

Imagine you're a professor.
Every day someone walks into your office and asks you to show them the equation to calculate the energy of a photon.

Are you going to show them every day for 10 years?  Or are you eventually going to stick a piece of paper on your door and say "Read it yourself!"?

Effort would be learning and using the scientific method, making observations, tons of calculations. Pretty much the equivalent of learning a language and using it fluently.

Zetetic Method; tu quoque.

I was inquiring as to the validity of my assumption. I was quite right it seems.

And I was amazed by how stupid you assumptions were. You were quite dumb, it seems.

I'm going to go for an answer you should well have posted by now and that really, truly, applies to you.

Lurk moar.

FEers reject the scientific method and the many inherent flaws found within.

The scientific method is simply testing an idea (whether you had it or someone else did) over and over again to see the outcome and see if the idea is correct, or incorrect. I don't see the flaws. Perhaps I'm missing something.

This post is an insult to logic. Lampooning a real fact is a pathetic display of ignorance and immaturity. If it was up to me, I would close this thread for being useless, inflammatory, and uninformative. It doesn't even have the entertainment value of some of certain spherical narratives.

I don't see the logic behind not really answering a newcomer's question.

You forgot Celestial Gears.

Anyway, the issue isn't that these answers are easy and quick and that's all they have.  The issue is that it's been answered so many time in so many ways that they just don't care to type it up.

Imagine you're a professor.
Every day someone walks into your office and asks you to show them the equation to calculate the energy of a photon.

Are you going to show them every day for 10 years?  Or are you eventually going to stick a piece of paper on your door and say "Read it yourself!"?

I'm not sure the professor is a good analogy. Perhaps the students are asking to be shown because the professor can provide further explanation for the equation? I think it is perfectly fair to answer these question, however frustrating it may be. When I came here, I read the FAQ, I lurked, I saw what I could find. It wasn't enough for me, I wanted to know more. So I asked for more. I have a 7 page thread (that contains my first post, I do believe) that asks for evidence, photographs. I wanted information. I got answers that said things like "Look out the window." If anything, that is an insult to logic.

Quote from: burt on July 24, 2012, 04:56:20 PM

I was inquiring as to the validity of my assumption. I was quite right it seems.

And I was amazed by how stupid you assumptions were. You were quite dumb, it seems.

Oh, dear. I think I offended someone.

Quote from: Pyriew on July 24, 2012, 09:28:21 PM

Quote from: burt on July 24, 2012, 04:56:20 PM

I was inquiring as to the validity of my assumption. I was quite right it seems.

And I was amazed by how stupid you assumptions were. You were quite dumb, it seems.

Oh, dear. I think I offended someone.

I was gonna say that. 

Quote from: burt on July 25, 2012, 09:03:57 AM

Quote from: Pyriew on July 24, 2012, 09:28:21 PM

Quote from: burt on July 24, 2012, 04:56:20 PM

I was inquiring as to the validity of my assumption. I was quite right it seems.

And I was amazed by how stupid you assumptions were. You were quite dumb, it seems.

Oh, dear. I think I offended someone.

I was gonna say that. 

Yeah, I guessed as much. you're so cute.

Quote from: Pyriew on July 25, 2012, 12:43:03 PM

Quote from: burt on July 25, 2012, 09:03:57 AM

Quote from: Pyriew on July 24, 2012, 09:28:21 PM

Quote from: burt on July 24, 2012, 04:56:20 PM

I was inquiring as to the validity of my assumption. I was quite right it seems.

And I was amazed by how stupid you assumptions were. You were quite dumb, it seems.

Oh, dear. I think I offended someone.

I was gonna say that. 

Yeah, I guessed as much. you're so cute.

The whole interaction between you two is pretty cute  .

I feel this thread will go nowhere.  Almost any answer, sufficiently simplified, could be called an easy out in a casual debate.  That doesn't mean it isn't the correct answer.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying any of the listed things are legitimate.  But simply calling them easy out answers is nearly as meaningless as most "easy out" answers are themselves. 

Quote from: burt on July 25, 2012, 02:30:18 PM

Quote from: Pyriew on July 25, 2012, 12:43:03 PM

Quote from: burt on July 25, 2012, 09:03:57 AM

Quote from: Pyriew on July 24, 2012, 09:28:21 PM

Quote from: burt on July 24, 2012, 04:56:20 PM

I was inquiring as to the validity of my assumption. I was quite right it seems.

And I was amazed by how stupid you assumptions were. You were quite dumb, it seems.

Oh, dear. I think I offended someone.

I was gonna say that. 

Yeah, I guessed as much. you're so cute.

The whole interaction between you two is pretty cute  .

I feel this thread will go nowhere.  Almost any answer, sufficiently simplified, could be called an easy out in a casual debate.  That doesn't mean it isn't the correct answer.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying any of the listed things are legitimate.  But simply calling them easy out answers is nearly as meaningless as most "easy out" answers are themselves.

I am not sure I agree with you. though the analysis makes a change from pyriews hyper-sensitive response.

 firstly, calling them easy out answers is just being truthful. Secondly, the answers simplicity does not bear on its "easy- way-outness" only its failure to answer simple, or even complex questions. moreover, these questions are usually ignored through concentrating on some minor detail of the rebuttal given or just ignored outright, until further time that some nonsense answer can be made up, in which case there is always a post with a nonsense answer so an evasive flat-earther can say "Lurk Moar, [affix sarcastic- comment-about-how-to-use-search-funtion here.]"

though posting it as a thread might have been useless because you have people like me on the forum.

Quote from: MrT on July 25, 2012, 03:34:48 PM

Quote from: burt on July 25, 2012, 02:30:18 PM

Quote from: Pyriew on July 25, 2012, 12:43:03 PM

Quote from: burt on July 25, 2012, 09:03:57 AM

Quote from: Pyriew on July 24, 2012, 09:28:21 PM

Quote from: burt on July 24, 2012, 04:56:20 PM

I was inquiring as to the validity of my assumption. I was quite right it seems.

And I was amazed by how stupid you assumptions were. You were quite dumb, it seems.

Oh, dear. I think I offended someone.

I was gonna say that. 

Yeah, I guessed as much. you're so cute.

The whole interaction between you two is pretty cute  .

I feel this thread will go nowhere.  Almost any answer, sufficiently simplified, could be called an easy out in a casual debate.  That doesn't mean it isn't the correct answer.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying any of the listed things are legitimate.  But simply calling them easy out answers is nearly as meaningless as most "easy out" answers are themselves.

I am not sure I agree with you. though the analysis makes a change from pyriews hyper-sensitive response.

 firstly, calling them easy out answers is just being truthful. Secondly, the answers simplicity does not bear on its "easy- way-outness" only its failure to answer simple, or even complex questions. moreover, these questions are usually ignored through concentrating on some minor detail of the rebuttal given or just ignored outright, until further time that some nonsense answer can be made up, in which case there is always a post with a nonsense answer so an evasive flat-earther can say "Lurk Moar, [affix sarcastic- comment-about-how-to-use-search-funtion here.]"

though posting it as a thread might have been useless because you have people like me on the forum.

What I meant was, in the context of this thread (where the OP asked people to post what they thought were "easy out" answers) just about anything could (and I thought likely would) be called an easy out answer.  When properly debated, many of them can be shown to be simply downright false, and not easy outs.  Still, I suppose they do get used as such regardless.

You're right, an answer being simple doesn't make it an easy out.  I just meant that virtually any one line answer was likely to be called an easy out by detractors.  Though, I guess that really isn't happening in this thread anyway.  It spiralled away from the original topic before the end of the first page.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to dissuade others from engaging in this thread or continuing the discussion.  I'm just adding my two cents to it.