An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?

  • 127 Replies
  • 8795 Views
*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #90 on: April 07, 2014, 06:47:22 AM »

I'd be happy with some dimensions. If it's square/rectangular, what are the lengths? if it's circular/round, what's the radius or diameter.

Trust me; not one of the flat earthers here will be able to give you any sort of definitive dimensions backed up with empirical evidence.  The proposed dimensions of their flat earth are entirely dependent on which flat earther is telling the story at the time, and has no basis whatsoever in reality. 


A couple of days down the track now, and not one flat earther has even attempted to give us any dimensions whatsoever for their proposed flat earth model.

It's now becoming more obvious every day that the flat earthers simply have no agreed-upon working model for their proposal of a flat earth.  And apart from a scribbled image on a piece of paper (courtesy sceptimatic) or referring to the United Nations logo(!), they seem not to even possess a formal map.

And at this point I should remind sceptimatic that he promised to produce a more detailed, elaborate version of his quick sketch within a few days of posting that sketch.  Where is it?

Or has it ended up in the same nebulous cyberspace location as his laser/ice experimental research results—that were going to completely reverse the theories of modern science?

Who can know?  Maybe sceptimatic is spending all his spare time working on some major new invention that'll be hitting the retail market soon—in order to maintain his fabulously wealthy lifestyle?  Or I guess he could be enjoying one of his numerous holiday trips into North Korea to visit the rest of the Dong family, or the Wangs?
 

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #91 on: May 02, 2014, 09:56:26 PM »
It is a theory with no evidence.
There is no evidence that supports it, but there is no evidence against it. This is the difference between string theory and pseudoscientific flat earth "theory". There is a very large body of evidence, such as the Foucault pendulum, that supports the fact that the earth is round and rotating, but until you see it with your own eyes you cry "FABRICATIONS!! LIES!!" and ignore the sharpness of Occam's razor.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2014, 09:58:54 PM by V »
i don't need a signature. go away.

Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #92 on: May 03, 2014, 04:31:54 AM »

I'd be happy with some dimensions. If it's square/rectangular, what are the lengths? if it's circular/round, what's the radius or diameter.

Trust me; not one of the flat earthers here will be able to give you any sort of definitive dimensions backed up with empirical evidence.  The proposed dimensions of their flat earth are entirely dependent on which flat earther is telling the story at the time, and has no basis whatsoever in reality. 


A couple of days down the track now, and not one flat earther has even attempted to give us any dimensions whatsoever for their proposed flat earth model.

It's now becoming more obvious every day that the flat earthers simply have no agreed-upon working model for their proposal of a flat earth.  And apart from a scribbled image on a piece of paper (courtesy sceptimatic) or referring to the United Nations logo(!), they seem not to even possess a formal map.

And at this point I should remind sceptimatic that he promised to produce a more detailed, elaborate version of his quick sketch within a few days of posting that sketch.  Where is it?

Or has it ended up in the same nebulous cyberspace location as his laser/ice experimental research results—that were going to completely reverse the theories of modern science?

Who can know?  Maybe sceptimatic is spending all his spare time working on some major new invention that'll be hitting the retail market soon—in order to maintain his fabulously wealthy lifestyle?  Or I guess he could be enjoying one of his numerous holiday trips into North Korea to visit the rest of the Dong family, or the Wangs?

Days? That's been a month, and i'm pretty sure i made a similar point else where, before that even.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #93 on: May 03, 2014, 06:14:07 AM »

After jroa claimed to have named a scientist who (purportedly) accepted the flat earth theory—after I'd asked him for half a dozen names—he failed to respond.

So, a few days afterwards, I posted this in an effort to get a few more names:

Quote
So where are your other five scientists who allegedly accept the flat earth model?

Now, an entire month later, he's still not posted any more names of scientists who accept the flat earth model.  Presumably this is because there are none... not even five!  Who knows?  I couldn't find any.

So, after a month, we can be sure that jroa has had more than enough time to research those scientists, and can now name them.

Over to you jroa.  (And please note that any other flat earther is more than welcome to answer my challenge of naming half a dozen accredited scientists who accept the flat earth model.)
 

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #94 on: May 03, 2014, 07:07:57 AM »

After jroa claimed to have named a scientist who (purportedly) accepted the flat earth theory—after I'd asked him for half a dozen names—he failed to respond.

So, a few days afterwards, I posted this in an effort to get a few more names:

Quote
So where are your other five scientists who allegedly accept the flat earth model?

Now, an entire month later, he's still not posted any more names of scientists who accept the flat earth model.  Presumably this is because there are none... not even five!  Who knows?  I couldn't find any.

So, after a month, we can be sure that jroa has had more than enough time to research those scientists, and can now name them.

Over to you jroa.  (And please note that any other flat earther is more than welcome to answer my challenge of naming half a dozen accredited scientists who accept the flat earth model.)
All I know is you'll find a lot of pseudoscientists.
i don't need a signature. go away.

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #95 on: May 03, 2014, 07:51:55 AM »
You can't hold the flat Earthers to any less standards than you do for your scientists.

We do because different theories in our scientific community come with at least some peer reviewed evidence or statistics. Your theories come with out of date text and things people on here have made up....

Please show us some evidence of string theory.  Oh, what is that?  There is no evidence?  It is just a theory?
What do know about string theory?
You have to be careful when talking about String Theory. People like the FE'ers in this forum know a couple of facts that are enough to make some reasonable people look silly:
- String "Theory" is not a theory in the same sense as, for example, Newton's Laws of Motion. It is, in the scientific lingo, a hypothesis. And until new fields of Physics are developed, (or maybe forever) it will continue to be an unobservable hypothesis.
- String Theory is a mathematical model, and as such it can only be tested for internal consistency. It currently does not predict observable phenomena of any kind.
- As such, String Theory is most probably useful as a seed for new hypothesis that will become observable in the future. It will not become as Relativity, a frequently verified, observable theory that gives us verifiable predictions.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #96 on: May 03, 2014, 09:33:49 AM »

After jroa claimed to have named a scientist who (purportedly) accepted the flat earth theory—after I'd asked him for half a dozen names—he failed to respond.

So, a few days afterwards, I posted this in an effort to get a few more names:

Quote
So where are your other five scientists who allegedly accept the flat earth model?

Now, an entire month later, he's still not posted any more names of scientists who accept the flat earth model.  Presumably this is because there are none... not even five!  Who knows?  I couldn't find any.

So, after a month, we can be sure that jroa has had more than enough time to research those scientists, and can now name them.

Over to you jroa.  (And please note that any other flat earther is more than welcome to answer my challenge of naming half a dozen accredited scientists who accept the flat earth model.)
 


Oh no.  I am done doing any research for you, ausGeoff.  Last time you demanded that I produce one single flat Earth scientist.  Not only did I provide a scientist who is a flat Earther, I also produced a university professor and a flat Earth researcher.  You simply brushed them all away, saying the researcher used a pseudonym and was therefore untrustworthy, the professor got his doctorate in philosophy, so he does not count, and the actual scientist was simply lying.  I am done wasting my time doing research for you.  Just like that RealScientist guy who demanded the name of one single NASA whistleblower and when I obliged him, he simply brushed it of as a joke. 

Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #97 on: May 03, 2014, 10:02:55 AM »
George Vanderkuur believes gravity is what makes things look curved from a distance.

Earlier in this thread jroa you made a point about "re" scientists not agreeing on things and how that should make us question stuff.

I would like to now turn this around. From what I can tell on this forum.........there are a good amount of people that believe the world is flat yet none of you can really agree on how the physics of that flat earth work. You can't agree on a map or any basic explanations.

And, as it would appear in Vanderkuur's place, can't even agree on whether gravity exists or not.

So.....why should anyone believe any of this?
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #98 on: May 03, 2014, 10:25:15 AM »
RE'ers are always complaining that FE'ers do not always agree with each other.  That was the reason I brought up the fact that RE scientists do not agree with each other either, yet, somehow, we are held to a higher standard. 

Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #99 on: May 03, 2014, 10:28:53 AM »
Quote
RE'ers are always complaining that FE'ers do not always agree with each other.  That was the reason I brought up the fact that RE scientists do not agree with each other either, yet, somehow, we are held to a higher standard. 

Mainstream scientists don't agree on every subject along the vast spectrum of subjects they study.

Yet they do agree on MANY basic principles of physics and other areas of science. Hypothesis are brought forward, moved to theories and tested repeatedly and sometimes become accepted facts and other times simply stay as theories.

FE "scientist" and believes can't even agree on a map. Or basic physics.

See the difference? I'm sure you do but will pretend you don't.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #100 on: May 03, 2014, 06:39:39 PM »
RE'ers are always complaining that FE'ers do not always agree with each other.  That was the reason I brought up the fact that RE scientists do not agree with each other either, yet, somehow, we are held to a higher standard.
FE pseudoscientists can not agree on basic pieces of information such as the size or shape of their flat earth or the sun or moon or stars.
Proper scientists agree on basic information such as the size of the earth, the distance to the moon, the distance to the sun, and a map.
i don't need a signature. go away.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #101 on: May 04, 2014, 05:19:39 AM »

Oh no.  I am done doing any research for you, ausGeoff.  Last time you demanded that I produce one single flat Earth scientist.  Not only did I provide a scientist who is a flat Earther, I also produced a university professor and a flat Earth researcher.  You simply brushed them all away, saying the researcher used a pseudonym and was therefore untrustworthy, the professor got his doctorate in philosophy, so he does not count, and the actual scientist was simply lying.  I am done wasting my time doing research for you

I thank you for at the very least inadvertently admitting you cannot name another five scientists who accept the flat earth theory jroa.

I see that you've attempted (unsuccessfully) to put the onus back on to me as the fly in the ointment here, but any logical thinker will see through your subterfuge instantly.  Sorry.

And you still seem unable to understand the fact that scientist George Vanderkuur was taking part in an educational "spoof" aimed at high schools kid's studies in logical reasoning.  Vanderkuur is in actuality (and quite predictably as such) a scientist who accepts the spherical model of the planet unequivocally.

And it shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes of your time to "research" the names of half a dozen accredited scientists who accept your flat earth model.  I can instantly name half a dozen scientists who accept the round earth model without doing any research at all;  I know of them (and more) off the top of my head.  Why would you be required to do any research to name half a dozen of your alleged flat earth scientists?  There must be hundreds of them globally?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #102 on: May 04, 2014, 08:51:13 AM »
Leo Ferrari was also in that video.  He was a founding member of the Flat Earth Society of Canada.  Are you also saying that he was lying? 

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #103 on: May 05, 2014, 08:02:10 AM »
Leo Ferrari was also in that video.  He was a founding member of the Flat Earth Society of Canada.  Are you also saying that he was lying?
The late Leo Ferrari facetiously styled himself as a "planoterrestrialist", and who in actuality accepted the spheroid earth model.

With obvious humorous overtones, his Flat Earth Society of Canada claimed a prevailing problem of the new technological age was the willingness of people to accept theories "on blind faith and to reject the evidence of their own senses." They did not actually believe flat earth theories, considering their proponents to be cranks.

You can check out Ferrari's Canadian FES HERE

So to answer your question; yes, Ferrari was distorting the truth.  But for a practical purpose 40 years ago.
 

 

Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #104 on: May 05, 2014, 08:58:58 AM »
Leo Ferrari was also in that video.  He was a founding member of the Flat Earth Society of Canada.  Are you also saying that he was lying?

Leo Ferrari was not a scientist, he was a philosophy professor.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #105 on: May 05, 2014, 05:15:23 PM »
Leo Ferrari was also in that video.  He was a founding member of the Flat Earth Society of Canada.  Are you also saying that he was lying?
The late Leo Ferrari facetiously styled himself as a "planoterrestrialist", and who in actuality accepted the spheroid earth model.

With obvious humorous overtones, his Flat Earth Society of Canada claimed a prevailing problem of the new technological age was the willingness of people to accept theories "on blind faith and to reject the evidence of their own senses." They did not actually believe flat earth theories, considering their proponents to be cranks.

You can check out Ferrari's Canadian FES HERE

So to answer your question; yes, Ferrari was distorting the truth.  But for a practical purpose 40 years ago.
 

 

Leo Ferrari was also in that video.  He was a founding member of the Flat Earth Society of Canada.  Are you also saying that he was lying?
The late Leo Ferrari facetiously styled himself as a "planoterrestrialist", and who in actuality accepted the spheroid earth model.

With obvious humorous overtones, his Flat Earth Society of Canada claimed a prevailing problem of the new technological age was the willingness of people to accept theories "on blind faith and to reject the evidence of their own senses." They did not actually believe flat earth theories, considering their proponents to be cranks.

You can check out Ferrari's Canadian FES HERE

So to answer your question; yes, Ferrari was distorting the truth.  But for a practical purpose 40 years ago.
 

 


Sounds like a lot of personal opinion, would you agree? 

Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #106 on: May 06, 2014, 07:16:10 AM »
Leo Ferrari was also in that video.  He was a founding member of the Flat Earth Society of Canada.  Are you also saying that he was lying?
He wasn't a scientist.  And yes, absolutely he was lying.

Just like you are.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39316
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #107 on: May 06, 2014, 07:27:34 AM »
Leo Ferrari was also in that video.  He was a founding member of the Flat Earth Society of Canada.  Are you also saying that he was lying?
Leo Ferrari also claimed to be the Archbishop of Canterbury.  Are you saying that he wasn't lying about that?
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.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #108 on: May 06, 2014, 07:38:56 AM »
Who cares?  He founded the Flat Earth Society of Canada, and he was a Professor of Philosophy at a University.  Did he smoke a joint when he was in college?  Maybe, but would that nullify everything else in his life?  I don't think so. 

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39316
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #109 on: May 06, 2014, 08:35:30 AM »
So, if the Archbishop of Canterbury. A.K.A. Leo Ferrari. says that the earth is flat, then it must be true?  Sounds more like a long running college prank to me.
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.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #110 on: May 06, 2014, 09:11:24 AM »
So, if the Archbishop of Canterbury. A.K.A. Leo Ferrari. says that the earth is flat, then it must be true?  Sounds more like a long running college prank to me.

lol, markjo.  You seem to equate everything with everything else.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39316
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #111 on: May 06, 2014, 09:40:52 AM »
You seem to equate everything with everything else.
???  How does that even make sense?
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
  • 8505
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #112 on: May 06, 2014, 12:45:46 PM »
Leo Ferrari was not a true flat earther. Yet, he poignantly embraced the sacred ability to doubt. He was closer to truth than he realized.
"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.."

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #113 on: May 06, 2014, 02:11:05 PM »
Leo Ferrari was not a true flat earther. Yet, he poignantly embraced the sacred ability to doubt. He was closer to truth than he realized.
The ability to doubt.
As if we don't have that already.
It's how we make progress in science. How do you think Galileo would have proven the heliocentric system if he refused to doubt? He clearly believed the earth was round.
Einstein? He doubted Newton's theories.
Planck? Schrödinger? They doubted classical physics, and replaced it with their own.
The ability to doubt is something that all proper scientists have. What flat-earthers have is the ability to doubt a fact that is painfully obvious.
i don't need a signature. go away.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #114 on: May 06, 2014, 02:46:47 PM »
Actually, Galileo just built upon the works of others.  And, Einstein was doubting Maxwell's theories.  Newton was out of the picture long before Einstein. 

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #115 on: May 06, 2014, 02:48:32 PM »
Actually, Galileo just built upon the works of others.  And, Einstein was doubting Maxwell's theories.  Newton was out of the picture long before Einstein.
And your point is?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #116 on: May 06, 2014, 02:51:28 PM »
Actually, Galileo just built upon the works of others.  And, Einstein was doubting Maxwell's theories.  Newton was out of the picture long before Einstein.
And your point is?

I was correcting the previous poster's misconceptions.  My post was on topic and the content was appropriate.  Your post contributed nothing to the topic at hand and I consider it to be low content.   Please, refrain from low content posting in the upper fora.  Consider this a warning, Starman. 

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #117 on: May 06, 2014, 02:53:50 PM »
Actually, Galileo just built upon the works of others.  And, Einstein was doubting Maxwell's theories.  Newton was out of the picture long before Einstein.
And your point is?

I was correcting the previous poster's misconceptions.  My post was on topic and the content was appropriate.  Your post contributed nothing to the topic at hand and I consider it to be low content.   Please, refrain from low content posting in the upper fora.  Consider this a warning, Starman.
Now that is funny. You make a statement that is basically your opinion and you snap to me about no content. Ok prove your false statement.

*

Vauxhall

  • 5914
  • dark matter does not exist
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #118 on: May 06, 2014, 02:54:46 PM »
Actually, Galileo just built upon the works of others.  And, Einstein was doubting Maxwell's theories.  Newton was out of the picture long before Einstein.
And your point is?

I was correcting the previous poster's misconceptions.  My post was on topic and the content was appropriate.  Your post contributed nothing to the topic at hand and I consider it to be low content.   Please, refrain from low content posting in the upper fora.  Consider this a warning, Starman.
Now that is funny. You make a statement that is basically your opinion and you snap to me about no content. Ok prove your false statement.

I would also consider this low content posting. Do you just like to read what you type, or what? Seriously, take your BS posts to the lower fora.
Read the FAQS.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: An RE'r threw this argument at me... What do I say?
« Reply #119 on: May 06, 2014, 02:57:34 PM »
Actually, Galileo just built upon the works of others.  And, Einstein was doubting Maxwell's theories.  Newton was out of the picture long before Einstein.
And your point is?

I was correcting the previous poster's misconceptions.  My post was on topic and the content was appropriate.  Your post contributed nothing to the topic at hand and I consider it to be low content.   Please, refrain from low content posting in the upper fora.  Consider this a warning, Starman.
Now that is funny. You make a statement that is basically your opinion and you snap to me about no content. Ok prove your false statement.

You are now claiming that when I state facts, it is just my opinion?  Also, that justifies your low content posting?