« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

what would it look like?

  • 48 Replies
  • 7724 Views
*

Pythagoras

  • 3274
what would it look like?
« on: December 20, 2012, 12:03:35 PM »
so i have always wondered what flat earth people would say to this so hear goes.

if a sphere had a diameter of 12 756.2 kilometers and you were standing at the very top and you were lets say 6ft tall, what shape would you assume the the object you were standing on to be if you had no other perspective of the object you were standing on ?

maby someone knows of a piece of software that could create the sphere of that size and allow us to look at the horizon from 6ft above its surface.
Logged
*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17933
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2012, 12:45:13 PM »
The earth would be flat until demonstrated otherwise.
Logged
*

Foxy

  • 3312
  • but it did happen
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2012, 12:47:10 PM »
Why don't you demonstrate how the Earth is flat?
Logged
?

Thork

Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #3 on: December 20, 2012, 12:48:16 PM »
Quote from: Berstram Jones on December 20, 2012, 12:47:10 PM
Why don't you demonstrate how the Earth is flat?
Tom has 15,000+ posts along those lines. Feel free to use the forum search function.
Logged
*

Foxy

  • 3312
  • but it did happen
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #4 on: December 20, 2012, 01:18:35 PM »
Quote from: Thork on December 20, 2012, 12:48:16 PM
Quote from: Berstram Jones on December 20, 2012, 12:47:10 PM
Why don't you demonstrate how the Earth is flat?
Tom has 15,000+ posts along those lines. Feel free to use the forum search function.

Not really. I haven't seen one of his explanations backed up by evidence or testing. And by his own admission, he does not test this stuff. I apologize if this is kind of off the topic itself, but I just have to point out that it doesn't work one way.
Logged
*

Pythagoras

  • 3274
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #5 on: December 20, 2012, 01:23:17 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on December 20, 2012, 12:45:13 PM
The earth would be flat until demonstrated otherwise.

so within the peramiters of the question. what you are standing on is a globe but from your perspeective you just said it would appear flat am i right or reading your reply right wrong?

Berstram Jones
you are forgiven.
Logged
*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #6 on: December 20, 2012, 02:36:21 PM »
That observation is also consistent with the top of a giant starfish or doughnut or snow man -- any shape of sufficient size. Should we assume the earth is any of these shapes?  ???
Logged
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #7 on: December 20, 2012, 04:38:22 PM »
Quote from: Ski on December 20, 2012, 02:36:21 PM
That observation is also consistent with the top of a giant starfish or doughnut or snow man -- any shape of sufficient size. Should we assume the earth is any of these shapes?  ???

No, but if observations do not conflict with the earth being any of those shapes, then you should not dismiss them out of hand.
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.
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #8 on: January 01, 2013, 10:31:22 PM »
Quote from: markjo on December 20, 2012, 04:38:22 PM
Quote from: Ski on December 20, 2012, 02:36:21 PM
That observation is also consistent with the top of a giant starfish or doughnut or snow man -- any shape of sufficient size. Should we assume the earth is any of these shapes?  ???

No, but if observations do not conflict with the earth being any of those shapes, then you should not dismiss them out of hand.


What is the difference between not dismissing any given model, and not accepting any given model? ???
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
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2013, 05:26:34 AM »
Quote from: Wilmore on January 01, 2013, 10:31:22 PM
Quote from: markjo on December 20, 2012, 04:38:22 PM
Quote from: Ski on December 20, 2012, 02:36:21 PM
That observation is also consistent with the top of a giant starfish or doughnut or snow man -- any shape of sufficient size. Should we assume the earth is any of these shapes?  ???

No, but if observations do not conflict with the earth being any of those shapes, then you should not dismiss them out of hand.


What is the difference between not dismissing any given model, and not accepting any given model? ???

It's the difference between disproving a given model and choosing to not even consider a given model.  If you cannot show a reason why a particular model is not true, then there is no reason to assume that the model is false.

It's sort of like the difference between you winning and me losing.  Just because I lose, that does not always mean that you win.  Or, to put it another way, just because you find problems with RET, that does not mean that FET is correct.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2013, 05:29:56 AM by markjo »
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.
*

Dinosaur Neil

  • 3177
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #10 on: January 02, 2013, 05:42:35 AM »
Quote from: Ski on December 20, 2012, 02:36:21 PM
That observation is also consistent with the top of a giant starfish or doughnut or snow man -- any shape of sufficient size. Should we assume the earth is any of these shapes?  ???

Since the reason often given for your assumption of flatness is "because it looks flat", I don't think Starfish Earth or Doughnut Earth should be dismissed out of hand. How do you know these are not correct shapes?
Logged
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
Quote from: John Davis on December 20, 2017, 11:04:01 AM
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.
*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #11 on: January 02, 2013, 02:56:09 PM »
The same reason that I don't assume invisible, flying, pink elephants are peeing when it rains. Just because I cannot prove something is not does not mean I must assume them likely or even possible. 
Logged
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."
*

Dinosaur Neil

  • 3177
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #12 on: January 02, 2013, 04:49:31 PM »
Quote from: Ski on January 02, 2013, 02:56:09 PM
The same reason that I don't assume invisible, flying, pink elephants are peeing when it rains. Just because I cannot prove something is not does not mean I must assume them likely or even possible.

Is that Zetetic? I'm no expert, but anything that's possible should be considered equally as long as your senses agree with it, right?
Logged
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
Quote from: John Davis on December 20, 2017, 11:04:01 AM
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #13 on: January 02, 2013, 06:54:51 PM »
Quote from: Ski on January 02, 2013, 02:56:09 PM
The same reason that I don't assume invisible, flying, pink elephants are peeing when it rains. Just because I cannot prove something is not does not mean I must assume them likely or even possible.

If someone were to assert that invisible, flying, pink elephants are peeing when it rains and you couldn't provide any evidence that contradicts that assertion, then why shouldn't you assume it possible?
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.
*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #14 on: January 02, 2013, 10:58:53 PM »
Why should I believe that assertion over the self-evident facts available?
Logged
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."
*

Salviati

  • 147
  • What is my Personal Text?
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #15 on: January 03, 2013, 02:14:34 AM »
Quote from: Ski on January 02, 2013, 10:58:53 PM
Why should I believe that assertion over the self-evident facts available?

Do you realize that your statement is a nail on FET's coffin, don't you?
Logged
Q: Why do you think the Earth is round?
A: Look out the window!
*

Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • 6758
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #16 on: January 03, 2013, 08:43:17 AM »
Quote from: Salviati on January 03, 2013, 02:14:34 AM
Quote from: Ski on January 02, 2013, 10:58:53 PM
Why should I believe that assertion over the self-evident facts available?

Do you realize that your statement is a nail on FET's coffin, don't you?

I don't see how that's a "nail in the coffin" at all.
Logged
?

Thork

Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #17 on: January 03, 2013, 08:45:22 AM »
FET grows by the day and so does the list of members.

RErs trapped by dogma are scared of the change.
Logged
*

Pythagoras

  • 3274
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #18 on: January 03, 2013, 08:48:52 AM »
even FET admits that on a round earth the earth horizon would appear to be flat so how is the fact that the horizon is flat evidence that the world is flat?
Logged
?

squevil

  • Official Member
  • 3184
  • Im Telling On You
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #19 on: January 03, 2013, 09:04:53 AM »
Flat earth theory doesn't have an opinion. I'm pretty sure it's not conscious.
Logged
*

Pythagoras

  • 3274
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #20 on: January 03, 2013, 09:18:21 AM »
well its easy enough to do. draw a circle any size you want and zoom in until you get to a scale ratio approaching the size of a human standing on its surface. and look and see. if your not happy with that. do it on a computer with a sphere on a CAD design software and repeat for the scale. you will see the horizon is flat. thus proven with once again a OBSERVABLE EXPERIMENT.
Logged
*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #21 on: January 03, 2013, 12:09:31 PM »
Quote from: Pythagoras on January 03, 2013, 08:48:52 AM
even FET admits that on a round earth the earth horizon would appear to be flat so how is the fact that the horizon is flat evidence that the world is flat?

Even Globularist Atheists admit that if angels were pushing the sun, it would move about the sky. So how is the fact that the sun is moving in the sky evidence that the earth is moving about the sun?
Logged
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."
*

Pythagoras

  • 3274
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #22 on: January 03, 2013, 12:19:39 PM »
angels pushing the sun? is their any meaning to this post or are you just trying to get your post count up?
Logged
*

Dinosaur Neil

  • 3177
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #23 on: January 03, 2013, 02:57:08 PM »
Quote from: Ski on January 02, 2013, 10:58:53 PM
Why should I believe that assertion over the self-evident facts available?

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on January 01, 2013, 10:16:47 PM
Nothing is self-evident, other than perhaps the self, and even that is disputed. To bring the term into discussion is idiotic.
Logged
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
Quote from: John Davis on December 20, 2017, 11:04:01 AM
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.
*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #24 on: January 03, 2013, 03:56:13 PM »
I will use the term "most direct inference" in its stead, just for you.
Logged
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #25 on: January 03, 2013, 04:34:23 PM »
Quote from: Ski on January 02, 2013, 10:58:53 PM
Why should I believe that assertion over the self-evident facts available?

I'm not saying that you should believe it, I'm just saying that as a Zetetic (or open minded scientist if you aren't a Zetetic) you shouldn't dismiss it without any evidence to the contrary.
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.
*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #26 on: January 03, 2013, 10:29:15 PM »
I've already admitted that a giant globe seems equally likely as a giant star fish; I'm not sure what else you could want of me.
Logged
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #27 on: January 04, 2013, 05:18:23 PM »
Quote from: Ski on January 03, 2013, 10:29:15 PM
I've already admitted that a giant globe seems equally likely as a giant star fish; I'm not sure what else you could want of me.

How about admitting that, on a very small scale (like, say, the view out your window), a giant globe is equally likely as a flat plane?
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.
*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #28 on: January 04, 2013, 05:38:31 PM »
Why is a room full of invisible fairies just as likely as the room being empty? Isn't it more likely that the room is just as it appears?
Logged
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: what would it look like?
« Reply #29 on: January 04, 2013, 06:32:20 PM »
???  What do invisible fairies have to do with the shape of the earth?
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.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »