Must Flat Earther's also subscribe to the moon hoax conspiracies?

They are liars and if you have seen that picture in space from your own telescope, then you are also a liar.

Once you find observable evidence that can be thoroughly backed up without the use of manipulation and indoctrination, I'd say it would destroy any other theory.

Do you know of anything that has or can destroy the flat earth theory that you can personally back up?

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 19, 2013, 07:42:37 AM

They are liars and if you have seen that picture in space from your own telescope, then you are also a liar.

Among the stupidest sentences ever recorded.  Sig'd.

Yes I've seen the ISS, in model form. There's loads of pictures of the model on the net. I've never seen it in space, because it does not exist, except from liars who post up stupid images of what's supposed to be the ISS in space.
They are liars and if you have seen that picture in space from your own telescope, then you are also a liar.

Logic will dictate that it's all a load of old tripe for many people.
You were told the earth is rotating and is a globe and you believe it because you are conscious of the masses believing the same thing.
Go and run into a packed church and tell them there is no god, then stay around for questions and answers.

It all depends on how you view things and how people view you.
A thousand people can kneel and pray to an invisible god and all will be fine.
You start walking the streets talking to your invisible friend and you will end up in a straight jacket.

What's real and what isn't, is a matter of using one's own logic, yet we are geared to ridicule each other if that logic differs from what others believe.

Quote from: RyanTG on May 19, 2013, 07:43:58 AM

You never really answered my question about how we know what is absolute truth by way of observation and using our senses. I don't really want to talk about scientists or education or any of that sort, I just want to figure this out.

I'll use the example of consciousness. I advocate the idea of materialism, that is the mind (brain) causes our consciousness by means of neuronal firings etc, which you may or may not agree with, but by observation, when somebody gets hit in the head they become mentally impaired, their consciousness is effected.

There is a phenomenon called an OBE, out of body experience. This is when people believe they float above their body, their consciousness transcends their body and they can perceive the world around them. By observation alone, (if you experienced this) you would come to the conclusion you really transcended your body. Have you really transcended your body however? This a perfect example of the human senses can be extremely fallible.

If you subscribe to the idea of materialism like me, you should conclude that no, you cannot transcend your body it is merely a neurological hallucination. But going by senses alone one would believe they are capable of leaving their body at will.

So how do we go about deciding what is right and what is wrong? In this endeavour for truth, there needs to be some sort of system in place that will enable us to differentiate between the truth and illusions. We certainly cannot use our senses, the zetetic method is prone to unbelievable fallibility.

The truth is, we don't even know our own minds, we do not know what is true and what is not true in terms of out of body, death etc experiences, so we have to go on what we perceive whilst we are conscious, as in, bodily functioning real world conscious, so on that note, we have to be able to physically verify what we see, or rely on faith as to what we think we can see.
It's like a belief in a god, or Noah or Moses, etc.
An historian can tell you all you need to know about Noah and Jesus and what not and you can recite all that to the next generation and yet you believe it all, (not you) or you have faith that's it's all what it was in those times.
There's people today that are looking for Noahs boat and believing he was over 800 years old.
Ask kids of today who built the Ark and most will tell you that Noah did and that he took all the animals in two by two.

People believe that and who is to say they are wrong to believe that?
Logic will dictate that it's all a load of old tripe for many people.
You were told the earth is rotating and is a globe and you believe it because you are conscious of the masses believing the same thing.
Go and run into a packed church and tell them there is no god, then stay around for questions and answers.

It all depends on how you view things and how people view you.
A thousand people can kneel and pray to an invisible god and all will be fine.
You start walking the streets talking to your invisible friend and you will end up in a straight jacket.

What's real and what isn't, is a matter of using one's own logic, yet we are geared to ridicule each other if that logic differs from what others believe.

You have built this worldview, it seems, so that everybody that advocates the mainstream consensus view on a topic is wrong but those that derive an answer through their own logical reasoning may not be correct, but are more correct than the first group. So I don't really have an opinion because I have been "indoctrinated", but your answers are perfectly valid because you formulated them yourself with no outside influences.

"...we have to be able to physically verify what we see, or rely on faith as to what we think we can see."

Don't you think that sort of reasoning is baseless or extremely unreliable? Why do you think so many people believe in psychics, ghosts, demons, useless alternative medications, UFOs, telepathy, auras etc?

They believe in them because they are applying the same method as you are advocating, believing in what one can observe through "logic" and through their senses.

Yet when they are tested under rigorous controlled studies, they all collapse in on themselves, there simply is nothing to them, ghosts do not exist, demons cannot possess people. Yet there are hundreds of millions of people, especially in third world countries that subscribe to this sort of witchcraft. People are stoned, in the 21st century because one person accuses another of possessing another's body or casting curses or demons on someone.

There are people who believe they can predict the future, which is absolutely absurd, but according to you, because they have this idea which has been derived through observation, they are perfectly correct in their reasoning.

Paranoia /ˌpærəˈnɔɪə/ (adjective: paranoid /ˈpærənɔɪd/) is a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracy concerning a perceived threat towards oneself. (e.g. "Everyone is out to get me.") Making false accusations and the general distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia

In what way do people who believe in the existence of ghosts or demons differ in the way they conclude that they exist compared to the way you conclude there are no satellites in space or that the earth is an infinite plane?

And I am not twisting anything, I am using what you just wrote to me in multiple paragraphs, "we have to be able to physically verify what we see, or rely on faith as to what we think we can see".

If you don't like how I summarise and use what you write you should be a little more clear.

Quote from: RyanTG on May 19, 2013, 09:00:08 AM

In what way do people who believe in the existence of ghosts or demons differ in the way they conclude that they exist compared to the way you conclude there are no satellites in space or that the earth is an infinite plane?

And I am not twisting anything, I am using what you just wrote to me in multiple paragraphs, "we have to be able to physically verify what we see, or rely on faith as to what we think we can see".

If you don't like how I summarise and use what you write you should be a little more clear.

I don't think in the end the will to believe differs regardless of its subject (science, empiricism, flat earth, round earth, jesus, luck, patriotism, god etc).

Quote from: RyanTG on May 19, 2013, 09:00:08 AM

In what way do people who believe in the existence of ghosts or demons differ in the way they conclude that they exist compared to the way you conclude there are no satellites in space or that the earth is an infinite plane?

And I am not twisting anything, I am using what you just wrote to me in multiple paragraphs, "we have to be able to physically verify what we see, or rely on faith as to what we think we can see".

If you don't like how I summarise and use what you write you should be a little more clear.

I don't think in the end the will to believe differs regardless of its subject (science, empiricism, flat earth, round earth, jesus, luck, patriotism, god etc).

Quote from: John Davis on May 20, 2013, 09:38:59 AM

Quote from: RyanTG on May 19, 2013, 09:00:08 AM

In what way do people who believe in the existence of ghosts or demons differ in the way they conclude that they exist compared to the way you conclude there are no satellites in space or that the earth is an infinite plane?

And I am not twisting anything, I am using what you just wrote to me in multiple paragraphs, "we have to be able to physically verify what we see, or rely on faith as to what we think we can see".

If you don't like how I summarise and use what you write you should be a little more clear.

I don't think in the end the will to believe differs regardless of its subject (science, empiricism, flat earth, round earth, jesus, luck, patriotism, god etc).

You don't have to will yourself to believe in observations and the subsequent theorems that spawn from these observations.  You have to will yourself to ignore these observations or believe something much larger and more complicated is responsible.

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 20, 2013, 10:53:41 AM

Quote from: John Davis on May 20, 2013, 09:38:59 AM

Quote from: RyanTG on May 19, 2013, 09:00:08 AM

In what way do people who believe in the existence of ghosts or demons differ in the way they conclude that they exist compared to the way you conclude there are no satellites in space or that the earth is an infinite plane?

And I am not twisting anything, I am using what you just wrote to me in multiple paragraphs, "we have to be able to physically verify what we see, or rely on faith as to what we think we can see".

If you don't like how I summarise and use what you write you should be a little more clear.

I don't think in the end the will to believe differs regardless of its subject (science, empiricism, flat earth, round earth, jesus, luck, patriotism, god etc).

You don't have to will yourself to believe in observations and the subsequent theorems that spawn from these observations.  You have to will yourself to ignore these observations or believe something much larger and more complicated is responsible.

When one does not will to believe something enough to overcome the norm, one is subject to the beliefs already in the subconscious sphere.  Confirmation bias creates scientific predictability.

Quote from: John Davis on May 21, 2013, 06:09:48 AM

Quote from: DuckDodgers on May 20, 2013, 10:53:41 AM

Quote from: John Davis on May 20, 2013, 09:38:59 AM

Quote from: RyanTG on May 19, 2013, 09:00:08 AM

In what way do people who believe in the existence of ghosts or demons differ in the way they conclude that they exist compared to the way you conclude there are no satellites in space or that the earth is an infinite plane?

And I am not twisting anything, I am using what you just wrote to me in multiple paragraphs, "we have to be able to physically verify what we see, or rely on faith as to what we think we can see".

If you don't like how I summarise and use what you write you should be a little more clear.

I don't think in the end the will to believe differs regardless of its subject (science, empiricism, flat earth, round earth, jesus, luck, patriotism, god etc).

You don't have to will yourself to believe in observations and the subsequent theorems that spawn from these observations.  You have to will yourself to ignore these observations or believe something much larger and more complicated is responsible.

When one does not will to believe something enough to overcome the norm, one is subject to the beliefs already in the subconscious sphere.  Confirmation bias creates scientific predictability.

When one carries out experiments to test predicted results and finds the experimental results match up, no will is needed.

If you could directly prove anything you say, you would not be here now. The fact that you are here is because you have a niggling doubt about your own schooling on stuff and are looking for some clarification.
You will probably deny this but I'm sure you aren't here just to shoot down the flat earth theory alone.

So now you are still here to prove that the earth is a globe right?

You are satisfied that the earth is a globe 100%, am I correct on this, or is there an element of doubt still in your mind?

Quote from: Puttah on May 21, 2013, 07:49:25 AM

Are you absolutely convinced the Earth is flat?

I'd kind of (just maybe) understand how you could think be absolutely convinced that the Earth isn't a sphere, but could you really be 100% sure that the Earth is flat? I mean, considering that you think that RET doesn't add up, I can't imagine how you could feel that FET does add up.

I am 100% convinced it's flat in my mind.

As far as the world goes, I am absolutely convinced the Earth is flat, hollow and round.  To me, I'm absolutely sure the Earth is flat.

I am also certain of the time, the capacity of the sphere, its current state, and the time coming. 

The time is The Flat Earth Society. Get ready.

Quote from: sceptimatic on May 21, 2013, 07:53:34 AM

Quote from: Puttah on May 21, 2013, 07:49:25 AM

Are you absolutely convinced the Earth is flat?

I'd kind of (just maybe) understand how you could think be absolutely convinced that the Earth isn't a sphere, but could you really be 100% sure that the Earth is flat? I mean, considering that you think that RET doesn't add up, I can't imagine how you could feel that FET does add up.

I am 100% convinced it's flat in my mind.

How could you possibly be convinced by the pseudo-scientific theories of FET such as bendy light, perspective and a bunch of maps that are completely wrong while simultaneously finding mainstream science to be wrong?

Quote from: John Davis on May 21, 2013, 07:54:15 AM

As far as the world goes, I am absolutely convinced the Earth is flat, hollow and round.  To me, I'm absolutely sure the Earth is flat.

I am also certain of the time, the capacity of the sphere, its current state, and the time coming. 

The time is The Flat Earth Society. Get ready.

For how many years have you been saying this now?

I'm not that great with time, years etc.  However, I believe you would say less than a year;  since my last mystical revelation.

A silly question though.  The year itself is irrelevant.  The age has changed -- also irrelevant.

It has been said that if people truly understood at an intimate level what I'm doing, the Awakening of Man would be at hand.

Quote from: John Davis on May 21, 2013, 08:07:44 AM

I'm not that great with time, years etc.  However, I believe you would say less than a year;  since my last mystical revelation.

A silly question though.  The year itself is irrelevant.  The age has changed -- also irrelevant.

It has been said that if people truly understood at an intimate level what I'm doing, the Awakening of Man would be at hand.

Are you high?

Quote from: John Davis on May 21, 2013, 08:07:44 AM

I'm not that great with time, years etc.  However, I believe you would say less than a year;  since my last mystical revelation.

A silly question though.  The year itself is irrelevant.  The age has changed -- also irrelevant.

It has been said that if people truly understood at an intimate level what I'm doing, the Awakening of Man would be at hand.

Are you high?

Quote from: Puttah on May 21, 2013, 07:49:25 AM

Are you absolutely convinced the Earth is flat?

I'd kind of (just maybe) understand how you could think be absolutely convinced that the Earth isn't a sphere, but could you really be 100% sure that the Earth is flat? I mean, considering that you think that RET doesn't add up, I can't imagine how you could feel that FET does add up.

I am 100% convinced it's flat in my mind.

I was giving you a chance to show that you have some sanity left in you.