Tom Bishop vs. The FAQ

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on January 03, 2013, 03:00:07 PM

Quote from: Beorn on January 03, 2013, 03:22:03 AM

Looking out of my window shows me that Tom is right.

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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

The principle is often incorrectly summarized as "other things being equal, a simpler explanation is better than a more complex one." In practice, the application of the principle often shifts the burden of proof in a discussion.^[a] The razor states that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate. Philosophers point out also that the exact meaning of simplest may be nuanced.

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on January 03, 2013, 03:00:07 PM

Quote from: Beorn on January 03, 2013, 03:22:03 AM

Looking out of my window shows me that Tom is right.

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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

Quote from: Beorn on January 03, 2013, 04:03:20 PM

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on January 03, 2013, 03:00:07 PM

Quote from: Beorn on January 03, 2013, 03:22:03 AM

Looking out of my window shows me that Tom is right.

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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

A flat plane is not intrinsically more simple than any other shape. Indeed, it could be said to be less likely, as occurrences of flat planes in nature are less common than occurrences of other shapes.
Did you fail to notice that's a fellow member of the Society you're disagreeing with?

Quote from: RealScientist on January 03, 2013, 07:53:22 AM

Quote from: Thork on January 03, 2013, 03:11:10 AM

Quote from: markjo on January 02, 2013, 06:44:57 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 02, 2013, 05:53:20 PM

Well, the person who wrote the FAQ has under 1500 posts, disappears for years at a time, and clearly has not read Earth Not a Globe. That should tell you something about the FAQ's credibility.

Actually, if you read the FAQ, you should notice that although Daniel started it, Wilmore and Roundy have also contributed to and made edits to it.  So you really can't blame it all on Daniel.

Can we blame you? You have over 20,000 posts and have never contributed anything to flat earth theory.

This is one of the clearest posts I have read that indicate to me that Thork is neither scientifically literate nor a true Zetetic.

It shows that Thork is not looking for the truth, or for evidence towards a better understanding of anything, but is just working on an "us against them" mentality. If you are not making Thork happy, you are not contributing.

And even if you are looking at Thork as a Zetetic, he is supposed to be looking for the truth without any kind of preconceptions, but in reality he is only seeing whether others agree with him or not.

Are you serious? So every scientist out there working on their theories are just operating under an us VS them mentality? Every scientist that berates another for sitting on their laurels, they are not looking for the truth or for evidence towards a better understanding of anything? I can't even begin to address the shear inanity of your post.

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on January 03, 2013, 03:00:07 PM

Quote from: Beorn on January 03, 2013, 03:22:03 AM

Looking out of my window shows me that Tom is right.

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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

Quote from: Beorn on January 03, 2013, 04:03:20 PM

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on January 03, 2013, 03:00:07 PM

Quote from: Beorn on January 03, 2013, 03:22:03 AM

Looking out of my window shows me that Tom is right.

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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

You are showing how you do not understand Occam's razor in the least.

You should read the material you are quoting. In particular, you will not see "the simplest answer is the most correct" anywhere in the material you quoted.

I guess it's good that I never said that then.

Quote from: RealScientist on January 04, 2013, 10:07:31 AM

Quote from: Beorn on January 03, 2013, 04:03:20 PM

Quote from: Dinosaur Neil on January 03, 2013, 03:00:07 PM

Quote from: Beorn on January 03, 2013, 03:22:03 AM

Looking out of my window shows me that Tom is right.

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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

You are showing how you do not understand Occam's razor in the least.

You should read the material you are quoting. In particular, you will not see "the simplest answer is the most correct" anywhere in the material you quoted.

I guess it's good that I never said that then.

This thread is a result of a misunderstanding of the role of the FAQ. I don't agree with everything in the FAQ. No-one could. It is designed to introduce newcomers to the broad collection of models grouped under the term 'Flat Earth Theory', which are all mutually exclusive. It is not, nor is it intended to be, a document enshrining FES dogma. Any FE'er who didn't disagree with anything in the FAQ would be an idiot, because it is obviously self-contradicting if taken to be some kind of doctrine (though I cannot see how any attentive reader would do that).

Quote from: Pongo on January 03, 2013, 08:51:02 AM

Quote from: RealScientist on January 03, 2013, 07:53:22 AM

Quote from: Thork on January 03, 2013, 03:11:10 AM

Quote from: markjo on January 02, 2013, 06:44:57 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on January 02, 2013, 05:53:20 PM

Well, the person who wrote the FAQ has under 1500 posts, disappears for years at a time, and clearly has not read Earth Not a Globe. That should tell you something about the FAQ's credibility.

Actually, if you read the FAQ, you should notice that although Daniel started it, Wilmore and Roundy have also contributed to and made edits to it.  So you really can't blame it all on Daniel.

Can we blame you? You have over 20,000 posts and have never contributed anything to flat earth theory.

This is one of the clearest posts I have read that indicate to me that Thork is neither scientifically literate nor a true Zetetic.

It shows that Thork is not looking for the truth, or for evidence towards a better understanding of anything, but is just working on an "us against them" mentality. If you are not making Thork happy, you are not contributing.

And even if you are looking at Thork as a Zetetic, he is supposed to be looking for the truth without any kind of preconceptions, but in reality he is only seeing whether others agree with him or not.

Are you serious? So every scientist out there working on their theories are just operating under an us VS them mentality? Every scientist that berates another for sitting on their laurels, they are not looking for the truth or for evidence towards a better understanding of anything? I can't even begin to address the shear inanity of your post.

What you understood is totally inane because you understood the exact opposite of what I said! It is Thork who is operating under an us versus them mentality.

You should read before posting.

Quote from: RealScientist on January 04, 2013, 10:00:07 AM

What you understood is totally inane because you understood the exact opposite of what I said! It is Thork who is operating under an us versus them mentality.

You should read before posting.

I fully understood what you said, I was drawing your conclusion to its end.

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on January 03, 2013, 09:31:20 PM

This thread is a result of a misunderstanding of the role of the FAQ. I don't agree with everything in the FAQ. No-one could. It is designed to introduce newcomers to the broad collection of models grouped under the term 'Flat Earth Theory', which are all mutually exclusive. It is not, nor is it intended to be, a document enshrining FES dogma. Any FE'er who didn't disagree with anything in the FAQ would be an idiot, because it is obviously self-contradicting if taken to be some kind of doctrine (though I cannot see how any attentive reader would do that).

So change the FAQ. You're the vice-president.