canal example: proof of flatness

  • 50 Replies
  • 5585 Views
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #30 on: May 02, 2013, 07:26:45 AM »
Why would anyone bother to go through the trouble of making a relatively short, perfectly straight stretch of railroad tracks if the Earth is round?  What would be the purpose of getting laser precision on this stretch when tracks all across the Earth work fine without this level of precision?

oh it must be because the earth is flat, thank goodness railroad engineers are in the "truth club" otherwise our rail system wouldn't work.

Or, maybe something about this story is not factual, whether the Earth is round or flat.  Hmmm?

oh boy jroa, you are inspiring! What if it is factual? hmmm

What's more likely.... the entire world is in on a global conspiracy or the .000000001% of the people here on TFEC are just crazy?

Argumentum ad populum is not a credible defense.

not as the only defense sure, but as yet another piece to the everest sized stock pile of evidence that should be telling you the earth is round, it's admissible.

A fallacy should never be used as evidence for anything.

what fallacy? You didn't even indicate which piece of evidence is false let alone explain why it's false. If someone with BOP provides proof then the Con has to say why it's not good proof. You can't just say, "nope, that's wrong!" Otherwise we can just deny anything no matter what evidence is provided.

Oh wait, that's already what you do.
I claimed your argument followed the argumentum ad populum fallacy.  You could have googled it if you did not know what it meant.  But basically, just because the majority of people believe something, that does not make it true.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #31 on: May 02, 2013, 07:35:53 AM »
Why would anyone bother to go through the trouble of making a relatively short, perfectly straight stretch of railroad tracks if the Earth is round?  What would be the purpose of getting laser precision on this stretch when tracks all across the Earth work fine without this level of precision?

oh it must be because the earth is flat, thank goodness railroad engineers are in the "truth club" otherwise our rail system wouldn't work.

Or, maybe something about this story is not factual, whether the Earth is round or flat.  Hmmm?

oh boy jroa, you are inspiring! What if it is factual? hmmm

What's more likely.... the entire world is in on a global conspiracy or the .000000001% of the people here on TFEC are just crazy?

Argumentum ad populum is not a credible defense.

not as the only defense sure, but as yet another piece to the everest sized stock pile of evidence that should be telling you the earth is round, it's admissible.

A fallacy should never be used as evidence for anything.

what fallacy? You didn't even indicate which piece of evidence is false let alone explain why it's false. If someone with BOP provides proof then the Con has to say why it's not good proof. You can't just say, "nope, that's wrong!" Otherwise we can just deny anything no matter what evidence is provided.

Oh wait, that's already what you do.
I claimed your argument followed the argumentum ad populum fallacy.  You could have googled it if you did not know what it meant.  But basically, just because the majority of people believe something, that does not make it true.

A logical fallacy does not mean it's wrong. In this case it is (as I mentioned) just more information on top of the plethora of information clashing with what you think. So, just because it is logically invalid to think argumentum ad populum arguments are true it doesn't mean that the population is wrong.

 

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #32 on: May 02, 2013, 07:39:41 AM »
In some circumstances, a person may argue that the fact that most people believes X implies that X is false. This line of thought is closely related to the ad hominem, appeal to emotion, poisoning the well, and guilt by association fallacies given that it invokes a person's contempt for the general populace or something about the general populace in order to persuade them that most are wrong about X. The ad populum reversal commits the same logical flaw as the original fallacy given that the idea "X is true" is inherently separate from the idea that "Most people believe X".

For example, consider the arguments:

    "Are you going to be a mindless conformist drone drinking milk and water like everyone else, or will you wake up and drink my product?"
    "Everyone likes The Beatles and that probably means that they didn't have nearly as much talent as <Y band>, which didn't sell out."
    "The German people today consists of the Auschwitz generation, with every person in power being guilty in some way. How on earth can we buy the generally held propaganda that the Soviet Union is imperialistic and totalitarian? Clearly, it must not be."
    "Most people still either hate gays or just barely tolerate their existence. How can you still buy their other line that claims that pederasty is wrong?"
    "Everyone loves <A actor>. <A actor> must be nowhere near as talented as the devoted and serious method actors that aren't so popular like <B actor>."

In general, the reversal usually goes: Most people believe A and B are both true. B is false. Thus, A is false. The similar fallacy of chronological snobbery is not to be confused with the ad populum reversal. Chronological snobbery is the claim that if belief in both X and Y was popularly held in the past and if Y was recently proved to be untrue then X must also be untrue. That line of argument is based on a belief in historical progress and notólike the ad populum reversal isóon whether or not X and/or Y is currently popular.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #33 on: May 02, 2013, 07:44:30 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #34 on: May 02, 2013, 08:01:16 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #35 on: May 02, 2013, 08:09:54 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

OK, I accept your apology.  However, I just want to say that a few hundred years ago, most people believed that you could tell if someone was a witch or not based their buoyancy.  Also, you could cure many diseases by blood letting.  And, magots spontaneously were born from flesh.

So, maybe the popular train of thought is not just a fallacy.  In certain cases, it can be flat out wrong.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #36 on: May 02, 2013, 08:14:31 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

OK, I accept your apology.  However, I just want to say that a few hundred years ago, most people believed that you could tell if someone was a witch or not based their buoyancy.  Also, you could cure many diseases by blood letting.  And, magots spontaneously were born from flesh.

So, maybe the popular train of thought is not just a fallacy.  In certain cases, it can be flat out wrong.

Not an apology. An admission, I explained that it was still relevant, which was the point in bringing it up.

Also,

A few hundred years ago, most people believed the earth was flat. Turns out they were flat out wrong.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #37 on: May 02, 2013, 08:19:53 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

OK, I accept your apology.  However, I just want to say that a few hundred years ago, most people believed that you could tell if someone was a witch or not based their buoyancy.  Also, you could cure many diseases by blood letting.  And, magots spontaneously were born from flesh.

So, maybe the popular train of thought is not just a fallacy.  In certain cases, it can be flat out wrong.

Not an apology. An admission, I explained that it was still relevant, which was the point in bringing it up.

Also,

A few hundred years ago, most people believed the earth was flat. Turns out they were flat out wrong.
Haha, rottingroom.  You made a funny.  You will make a good flat Earther one of these days.  You will turn to the dark side.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #38 on: May 02, 2013, 08:24:09 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

OK, I accept your apology.  However, I just want to say that a few hundred years ago, most people believed that you could tell if someone was a witch or not based their buoyancy.  Also, you could cure many diseases by blood letting.  And, magots spontaneously were born from flesh.

So, maybe the popular train of thought is not just a fallacy.  In certain cases, it can be flat out wrong.

Not an apology. An admission, I explained that it was still relevant, which was the point in bringing it up.

Also,

A few hundred years ago, most people believed the earth was flat. Turns out they were flat out wrong.
Haha, rottingroom.  You made a funny.  You will make a good flat Earther one of these days.  You will turn to the dark side.

Well not everyone is born crazy, I bet you used to have the ability to reason once too.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #39 on: May 02, 2013, 08:26:54 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

OK, I accept your apology.  However, I just want to say that a few hundred years ago, most people believed that you could tell if someone was a witch or not based their buoyancy.  Also, you could cure many diseases by blood letting.  And, magots spontaneously were born from flesh.

So, maybe the popular train of thought is not just a fallacy.  In certain cases, it can be flat out wrong.

Not an apology. An admission, I explained that it was still relevant, which was the point in bringing it up.

Also,

A few hundred years ago, most people believed the earth was flat. Turns out they were flat out wrong.
Haha, rottingroom.  You made a funny.  You will make a good flat Earther one of these days.  You will turn to the dark side.

Well not everyone is born crazy, I bet you used to have the ability to reason once too.
Yes, I did.  Until I found out that I had been lied to all this time, that is.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #40 on: May 02, 2013, 08:28:41 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

OK, I accept your apology.  However, I just want to say that a few hundred years ago, most people believed that you could tell if someone was a witch or not based their buoyancy.  Also, you could cure many diseases by blood letting.  And, magots spontaneously were born from flesh.

So, maybe the popular train of thought is not just a fallacy.  In certain cases, it can be flat out wrong.

Not an apology. An admission, I explained that it was still relevant, which was the point in bringing it up.

Also,

A few hundred years ago, most people believed the earth was flat. Turns out they were flat out wrong.
Haha, rottingroom.  You made a funny.  You will make a good flat Earther one of these days.  You will turn to the dark side.

Well not everyone is born crazy, I bet you used to have the ability to reason once too.
Yes, I did.  Until I found out that I had been lied to all this time, that is.

You didn't find that out. You lost your mind bud.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #41 on: May 02, 2013, 08:32:08 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

OK, I accept your apology.  However, I just want to say that a few hundred years ago, most people believed that you could tell if someone was a witch or not based their buoyancy.  Also, you could cure many diseases by blood letting.  And, magots spontaneously were born from flesh.

So, maybe the popular train of thought is not just a fallacy.  In certain cases, it can be flat out wrong.

Not an apology. An admission, I explained that it was still relevant, which was the point in bringing it up.

Also,

A few hundred years ago, most people believed the earth was flat. Turns out they were flat out wrong.
Haha, rottingroom.  You made a funny.  You will make a good flat Earther one of these days.  You will turn to the dark side.

Well not everyone is born crazy, I bet you used to have the ability to reason once too.
Yes, I did.  Until I found out that I had been lied to all this time, that is.

You didn't find that out. You lost your mind bud.


I like you, rootingroom.  You don't take shit off of us FE'rs.  It would be nice, however, if you could give us conclusive proof that supports your stance on the shape of the Earth.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #42 on: May 02, 2013, 08:59:02 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

OK, I accept your apology.  However, I just want to say that a few hundred years ago, most people believed that you could tell if someone was a witch or not based their buoyancy.  Also, you could cure many diseases by blood letting.  And, magots spontaneously were born from flesh.

So, maybe the popular train of thought is not just a fallacy.  In certain cases, it can be flat out wrong.

Not an apology. An admission, I explained that it was still relevant, which was the point in bringing it up.

Also,

A few hundred years ago, most people believed the earth was flat. Turns out they were flat out wrong.
Haha, rottingroom.  You made a funny.  You will make a good flat Earther one of these days.  You will turn to the dark side.

Well not everyone is born crazy, I bet you used to have the ability to reason once too.
Yes, I did.  Until I found out that I had been lied to all this time, that is.

You didn't find that out. You lost your mind bud.


I like you, rootingroom.  You don't take shit off of us FE'rs.  It would be nice, however, if you could give us conclusive proof that supports your stance on the shape of the Earth.

Like I said, we both have the BOP. Here is how each of us (not you and me, but round-earthers and flat-earthers) has handled this task:

Earth is Round
What do you want me to do? This is a forum and unless I hold your hand and take you on a fantastic voyage on the seven seas or in a rocket ship myself you're not gonna accept that as fact. Tons of crap has been brought up to flat earthers on these forums over and over again including photographs, observable facts and mathematics that are consistent with a globe, personal accounts of circumnavigation and accounts of how the methods to successfully do this are only compatible with a round earth and showing exactly why that is... really this list can go on and on and on and on. You've seen all of this. As I've mentioned our burden of proof has been met. We have provided a TON of evidence and so from there the BOP shifts to you to prove that all that evidence is wrong... and I've yet to hear a good case on why any of it is false.

Earth is Flat
Much like round-earthers make the assertion that the Earth is round, you flat-earth are making an equally assertive claim that it is flat and have not provided a SINGLE piece of evidence. N-O-T O-N-E P-I-E-C-E. The Burden of Proof does not shift and you are burdened.

So not only do you have the BOP to prove the Earth is flat but you also have the BOP to disprove the evidence Round-Earthers have presented.


?

odes

  • 293
  • Everything else is a fairy tale!
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #43 on: May 02, 2013, 09:21:56 AM »


Can the datum horizontal line in fact be curved, without the measuring equipment making that obvious?
Quote from: Rushy
No bawwing is necessary.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • Around the world.
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #44 on: May 02, 2013, 09:45:58 AM »


Can the datum horizontal line in fact be curved, without the measuring equipment making that obvious?

It's not in fact anything. It's a collection of points used for planning. There is no physical line.

?

odes

  • 293
  • Everything else is a fairy tale!
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #45 on: May 03, 2013, 05:41:47 PM »
I know that there isn't a physical line, but rather a conceptual line. Can it be either curved or straight, and equally valid as a help to builders?
Quote from: Rushy
No bawwing is necessary.

?

Scintific Method

  • 1448
  • Trust, but verify.
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #46 on: May 03, 2013, 07:04:36 PM »
I know that there isn't a physical line, but rather a conceptual line. Can it be either curved or straight, and equally valid as a help to builders?

Absolutely! It's only a reference line, and can be curved if necessary for a large project.
Quote from: jtelroy
...the FE'ers still found a way to deny it. Not with counter arguments. Not with proof of any kind. By simply denying it.

"Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt."

Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #47 on: May 11, 2013, 06:52:50 AM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

OK, I accept your apology.  However, I just want to say that a few hundred years ago, most people believed that you could tell if someone was a witch or not based their buoyancy.  Also, you could cure many diseases by blood letting.  And, magots spontaneously were born from flesh.

So, maybe the popular train of thought is not just a fallacy.  In certain cases, it can be flat out wrong.

Not an apology. An admission, I explained that it was still relevant, which was the point in bringing it up.

Also,

A few hundred years ago, most people believed the earth was flat. Turns out they were flat out wrong.
Haha, rottingroom.  You made a funny.  You will make a good flat Earther one of these days.  You will turn to the dark side.

Well not everyone is born crazy, I bet you used to have the ability to reason once too.
Yes, I did.  Until I found out that I had been lied to all this time, that is.

You didn't find that out. You lost your mind bud.


I like you, rootingroom.  You don't take shit off of us FE'rs.  It would be nice, however, if you could give us conclusive proof that supports your stance on the shape of the Earth.

Like I said, we both have the BOP. Here is how each of us (not you and me, but round-earthers and flat-earthers) has handled this task:

Earth is Round
What do you want me to do? This is a forum and unless I hold your hand and take you on a fantastic voyage on the seven seas or in a rocket ship myself you're not gonna accept that as fact. Tons of crap has been brought up to flat earthers on these forums over and over again including photographs, observable facts and mathematics that are consistent with a globe, personal accounts of circumnavigation and accounts of how the methods to successfully do this are only compatible with a round earth and showing exactly why that is... really this list can go on and on and on and on. You've seen all of this. As I've mentioned our burden of proof has been met. We have provided a TON of evidence and so from there the BOP shifts to you to prove that all that evidence is wrong... and I've yet to hear a good case on why any of it is false.

Earth is Flat
Much like round-earthers make the assertion that the Earth is round, you flat-earth are making an equally assertive claim that it is flat and have not provided a SINGLE piece of evidence. N-O-T O-N-E P-I-E-C-E. The Burden of Proof does not shift and you are burdened.

So not only do you have the BOP to prove the Earth is flat but you also have the BOP to disprove the evidence Round-Earthers have presented.

I disagree entirely. 

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #48 on: May 11, 2013, 12:14:07 PM »
For the life of me, I can't figure out if you are apologizing, or trying to justify your use of a fallacy in a debate.  I am hoping that you are admitting that you were wrong so we can move on to the important discussion of the topic.

I admit, I used the fallacy. I still don't think you should dismiss it to mean it's not true or else it's a reversal argumentum ad populum as I explained.

It is relevant that everyone thinks the earth is round especially since humanity has evidence that supports the assertion.

OK, I accept your apology.  However, I just want to say that a few hundred years ago, most people believed that you could tell if someone was a witch or not based their buoyancy.  Also, you could cure many diseases by blood letting.  And, magots spontaneously were born from flesh.

So, maybe the popular train of thought is not just a fallacy.  In certain cases, it can be flat out wrong.

Not an apology. An admission, I explained that it was still relevant, which was the point in bringing it up.

Also,

A few hundred years ago, most people believed the earth was flat. Turns out they were flat out wrong.
Haha, rottingroom.  You made a funny.  You will make a good flat Earther one of these days.  You will turn to the dark side.

Well not everyone is born crazy, I bet you used to have the ability to reason once too.
Yes, I did.  Until I found out that I had been lied to all this time, that is.

You didn't find that out. You lost your mind bud.


I like you, rootingroom.  You don't take shit off of us FE'rs.  It would be nice, however, if you could give us conclusive proof that supports your stance on the shape of the Earth.

Like I said, we both have the BOP. Here is how each of us (not you and me, but round-earthers and flat-earthers) has handled this task:

Earth is Round
What do you want me to do? This is a forum and unless I hold your hand and take you on a fantastic voyage on the seven seas or in a rocket ship myself you're not gonna accept that as fact. Tons of crap has been brought up to flat earthers on these forums over and over again including photographs, observable facts and mathematics that are consistent with a globe, personal accounts of circumnavigation and accounts of how the methods to successfully do this are only compatible with a round earth and showing exactly why that is... really this list can go on and on and on and on. You've seen all of this. As I've mentioned our burden of proof has been met. We have provided a TON of evidence and so from there the BOP shifts to you to prove that all that evidence is wrong... and I've yet to hear a good case on why any of it is false.

Earth is Flat
Much like round-earthers make the assertion that the Earth is round, you flat-earth are making an equally assertive claim that it is flat and have not provided a SINGLE piece of evidence. N-O-T O-N-E P-I-E-C-E. The Burden of Proof does not shift and you are burdened.

So not only do you have the BOP to prove the Earth is flat but you also have the BOP to disprove the evidence Round-Earthers have presented.

I disagree entirely.

Go on...
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

?

Jingle Jangle

  • 284
  • I breathe therefore I am
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #49 on: May 12, 2013, 08:08:35 AM »
An argument often encountered in FE literature is the putative fact that engineers ignore earth's supposed curvature when designing/building bridges, railroads, tall buildings, and canals. I think the issue has been argued to a standstill regarding bridges and tall buildings. I'm not sure about railroads. It depends upon how much extra track and ties are truly needed. If the discrepancy is significant, cost factors could be affected, and cushy engineering jobs lost.

However I haven't looked much at canals yet. For a short canal, yes, one can say that simply digging a bit deeper here or there might suffice. But here is a case that we should look at, namely, the 100-mile Suez canal connecting the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. From Earth--Monthly Magazine Numbers 47-48, I find these pictures.

First, the full two-page spread of the canal:


Next, the image portion from the left-hand page:


Next, the image portion from the right-hand page:


Here is a brief discussion given in the article:


Is this a convincing case that encourages the opinion that the earth is flat? Or is it merely the case that the earth happens to be flattish in that area?

This particular canal validates completely the evidence that all things that disappear over the horizon are caused by mirages.  The canal causes slightly less humidity than a large body of water and so no sinking is evident..  No need to factor in bendable light in this equation as well...  Score one for the flat earth.

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: canal example: proof of flatness
« Reply #50 on: May 16, 2013, 06:01:21 AM »

This particular canal validates completely the evidence that all things that disappear over the horizon are caused by mirages.  The canal causes slightly less humidity than a large body of water and so no sinking is evident..  No need to factor in bendable light in this equation as well...  Score one for the flat earth.

Sorry, but a canal does not validate a single thing. And a diagram that is not declared by the authors to be precise in any way is also no demonstration of anything. At least since Babilonian times most of the diagrams have been more illustrative than precise. In fact, take the latest user guide from the last appliance you have bought. Chances are, it is filled with diagrams that change the appearance, colors and sizes of whatever they are showing, in an attempt at making them more readable.

If you don't have the written statement of the author of the diagram declaring that the drawing was done to precise measures in every way, even including the curvature of the Earth if any, then you have nothing.