"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK

  • 164 Replies
  • 32175 Views
"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« on: November 02, 2006, 07:04:39 AM »
Good evening gentlemen,

Below I am going to demonstrate why an FE’er cannot win an argument with an RE’er with regards to the shape of the earth (edit dedicated to the deficient thebeast) using their current methods of debate. To support my argument, I am posting two different analyses, both of which must be disproved in order to prove my initial claim as false (please note that only one of these analyses is strong enough to disprove the logic of the FE'ers).




Analysis 1:

Let’s begin with the definition of negative proof (in reference to "logical fallacy", not "proof of impossibility"). A negative proof is a statement such as:

“X exists because there is no proof that X doesn't exist.”

OR

“How come you think the flat earth exists?"
"Well, how come you think it doesn't exist?"

In most debates with FE’ers (such as Erasmus, GeoGuy, thebeast and many, many others), such negative proof is encountered somewhere, for example in statements such as “there is a government conspiracy because there is no proof that there isn’t a government cospiracy”, “the ice wall exists because you cannot prove that it doesn’t”, “photos taken from space have been falsified because there is no proof that they haven’t been falsified”, or even “the earth is flat because you cannot prove that it isn’t”. As stated above, negative proof can also have the form "How come you think there is a government conspiracy?" to which they respond "Well, how come you think that there isn't one?", etc.

It is also widely known that if elements such as the “ice wall”, “RE government conspiracy”, and other nonsense - which I will not bother to enumerate here - did not exist, then the FE “theory” would fail miserably.

Fortunately, FE’ers themselves sealed the tragic fate of “FE’ism” through their methods of arguing. Negative proof is by definition a logical falacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_%28logical_fallacy%29). A logical falacy is a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which renders the argument invalid i.e. FE’ers make invalid arguments. Therefore, from hereon out when you encounter such a statement while arguing with a FE’er, consider the argument won i.e. their argument invalid i.e. there is no need to continue the conversation with them.




Analysis 2:

FE’ers claim that the burden of proof lies of RE’ers, or “the accusers”. This is false. Please note that “outside a legal context, "burden of proof" means that someone suggesting a new theory or stating a claim must provide evidence to support it: it is not sufficient to say, "you can't disprove this". Specifically, when anyone is making a bold claim, it is not someone else's responsibility to disprove the claim, but is rather the person's responsibility who is making the bold claim to prove it”. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof). If that wording proves too difficult for FE’ers, then here is a simpler explanation: “The less reasonable a statement seems, the more proof it requires” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof).




Conclusions:

There are 2 conclusions that can be drawn from the analysis presented above:
    1) Since FE’ers use logical falacies (in the form of negative proofs) in their arguments, and since they believe that the burden of proof lies with RE’ers, their arguments automatically fail. In other words, nobody needs to disprove anything in the FE “theory” since it hasn’t even been proved.
    2) The only way that the FE “theory” can become a theory is if FE’ers find other ways to argue, for example by providing evidence for their claims (rather than saying “there is a government conspiracy because there is no proof that there isn’t a government cospiracy”).

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2006, 07:10:46 AM »
well said

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2006, 07:23:09 AM »
Quote from: "IHaveQuestions"
well said


there's no proof that it was well said therefore it must have been poorly said.
an vir

*

beast

  • 2997
"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #3 on: November 02, 2006, 07:49:03 AM »
You are wrong and I can prove it.

Here is a topic that was debated a while ago.  It is between Luke_smith64 and myself.  Luke is clearly a REer and I am clearly a FEer.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4963

As you can see the debate was about if "learnt" was a real word and what context it could be used in or not.  If you follow the debate you will see that Luke was proved completely incorrect on a number of fronts and ended up being proved completely wrong and left the forum forever!

So in this argument who would you say won?  The REer who thought you can't use "learnt" in "written English," or the FEer who quoted "learnt" being used in a number of award winning works of english literature?

I'm assuming you accept the FEer (me) won this argument.

Now you said:

Quote
Below I am going to demonstrate why an FE’er cannot win an argument with an RE’er using their current methods of debate.


But clearly I've just demonstrated a time when a FEer did win an argument against a REer.  Surely this contradicts your statement that FEers cannot beat REers in arguements.  You did not specify what the topic of the argument had to be about.  Therefore you are wrong and only one example is needed to prove this.  Of course there are actually thousands of examples - another good one is that topic where 3 different REers all tried to claim that gravity is caused by electromagnetism and were destroyed by FEers because they are so clearly wrong.

?

GeoGuy

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #4 on: November 02, 2006, 09:15:23 AM »
Quote from: "bibicul"


Analysis 1:

Let’s begin with the definition of negative proof (in reference to "logical fallacy", not "proof of impossibility"). A negative proof is a statement such as:

“X exists because there is no proof that X doesn't exist.”

OR

“How come you think the flat earth exists?"
"Well, how come you think it doesn't exist?"

In most debates with FE’ers (such as Erasmus, GeoGuy, thebeast and many, many others), such negative proof is encountered somewhere, for example in statements such as “there is a government conspiracy because there is no proof that there isn’t a government cospiracy”, “the ice wall exists because you cannot prove that it doesn’t”, “photos taken from space have been falsified because there is no proof that they haven’t been falsified”, or even “the earth is flat because you cannot prove that it isn’t”. As stated above, negative proof can also have the form "How come you think there is a government conspiracy?" to which they respond "Well, how come you think that there isn't one?", etc.


You'll have to provide some examples of actual posts, because I've never seen a FE say anything remotely like that.



Quote
Analysis 2:

FE’ers claim that the burden of proof lies of RE’ers, or “the accusers”. This is false. Please note that “outside a legal context, "burden of proof" means that someone suggesting a new theory or stating a claim must provide evidence to support it: it is not sufficient to say, "you can't disprove this". Specifically, when anyone is making a bold claim, it is not someone else's responsibility to disprove the claim, but is rather the person's responsibility who is making the bold claim to prove it”. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof). If that wording proves too difficult for FE’ers, then here is a simpler explanation: “The less reasonable a statement seems, the more proof it requires” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof).


The first part of your post I quoted is a perfect example of what FE's mean when they say the burden of proof lies with the RE's. You just made the statement that FE's say

Quote
“X exists because there is no proof that X doesn't exist.”


as evidence for a FE, yet failed to provide a single piece of evidence to back up your claims.
 When an RE says something like "It is proven that Earth is round" He then has to provide evidence to show exactly how it's been proven. So the burden of proof is on him.

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #5 on: November 02, 2006, 10:22:49 AM »
GeoGuy: I don't think evidence is needed here, we've all seen it numerous times, but I doubt it will be hard to link to several threads where it was done.

Beast: The argument you won had nothing to do with supporting FE "theory". If you proved that the term learnt doesn't exist, good for you, but it's not within the topic of this thread.

Bibicul: I fully endorse this product :)
atttttttup was right when he said joseph bloom is right, The Engineer is a douchebag.

?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
Re: "FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #6 on: November 02, 2006, 10:42:50 AM »
Quote from: "bibicul"
In most debates with FE’ers such negative proof is encountered somewhere, for example in statements such as “there is a government conspiracy because there is no proof that there isn’t a government cospiracy”, “the ice wall exists because you cannot prove that it doesn’t”, “photos taken from space have been falsified because there is no proof that they haven’t been falsified”, or even “the earth is flat because you cannot prove that it isn’t”. As stated above, negative proof can also have the form "How come you think there is a government conspiracy?" to which they respond "Well, how come you think that there isn't one?", etc.


I have never in my entire time on these forums seen anyone (yes, that even includes the trolls) ever try to prove an argument like this.
I would highly suggest ignoring phaseshifter, as evidence is very much needed here.
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.

the sun
« Reply #7 on: November 02, 2006, 12:18:17 PM »
Proof of the sun

y the Power of Round Earth!!!

I HAVE THE POWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Flexgirl

*

dysfunction

  • The Elder Ones
  • 2261
"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #8 on: November 02, 2006, 01:19:15 PM »
Proof of SunnyD

the cake is a lie

THE BEST RESPONSE EVER
« Reply #9 on: November 02, 2006, 01:24:42 PM »
THIS IS THE BEST RESPONSE EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
y the Power of Round Earth!!!

I HAVE THE POWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Flexgirl

?

GeoGuy

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #10 on: November 02, 2006, 01:30:43 PM »
What brought your recent rash of spam posts?

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #11 on: November 02, 2006, 01:37:29 PM »
To torment everyone. just for the sake of torment.
y the Power of Round Earth!!!

I HAVE THE POWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Flexgirl

?

GeoGuy

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #12 on: November 02, 2006, 01:41:29 PM »
Quote from: "FlexGirl"
To torment everyone. just for the sake of torment.


Careful then, that's a fantastic way to get yourself banned.

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #13 on: November 02, 2006, 01:49:26 PM »
First of all, What I did didnt cause that much damage. Second, it brakes up what ever heated debate is going on. Which is good, so everyone can come back with a bit of a fresher mind and a little laugh. Third, with what crazy rude and condicending and childish things that were ever said, and they still havent been band, then this little post could not possibly get me banned. Plus, it was funny, if you had the sound up.
y the Power of Round Earth!!!

I HAVE THE POWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Flexgirl

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #14 on: November 02, 2006, 01:51:52 PM »
I've skipped through some of the replies to my post and honestly, I did not find a single one worth replying to. There's no problem if people try to prove me wrong. What I will do however, is update this thread often so that it stays on top for people to read when they come onto this website.

What I posted is pure logic; I have no idea how you will refute it. thebeasts's reply is a waste of time in my opinion and a pathetic attempt to shift attention to unimportant details; GeoGuy's posts simply make no sense and I honestly don't read them anymore fully, while EnragedPenguin is asking me to waste time linking posts that common visitors on this website know exist. I am not answering to such rubbish.

When (actually, if) you come up with something a little more intelligent, maybe we can engage in a debate. Until then, I will do no more but update this thread, like I said, in order for people to read my initial post.

?

GeoGuy

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #15 on: November 02, 2006, 01:55:28 PM »
Quote from: "FlexGirl"
First of all, What I did didnt cause that much damage. Second, it brakes up what ever heated debate is going on. Which is good, so everyone can come back with a bit of a fresher mind and a little laugh. Third, with what crazy rude and condicending and childish things that were ever said, and they still havent been band, then this little post could not possibly get me banned. Plus, it was funny, if you had the sound up.


I wasn't referring to just the post in this thread, I was talking about the other five links to the same video you posted all over the forums. I also didn't say that this particular incedent would get you banned, I meant that spamming threads with links to videos that have nothing to do with the topic of the thread in general will.

?

joffenz

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1272
Re: "FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #16 on: November 02, 2006, 02:00:22 PM »
Quote from: "bibicul"
Analysis 1:

...

In most debates with FE’ers (such as Erasmus, GeoGuy, thebeast and many, many others), such negative proof is encountered somewhere, for example in statements such as “there is a government conspiracy because there is no proof that there isn’t a government cospiracy”, “the ice wall exists because you cannot prove that it doesn’t”, “photos taken from space have been falsified because there is no proof that they haven’t been falsified”, or even “the earth is flat because you cannot prove that it isn’t”. ...


The burden of proof is on you to provide examples of real quotes, not random statements you made up.

Analysis 2:

FE’ers claim that the burden of proof lies of RE’ers, or “the accusers”. This is false. Please note that “outside a legal context, "burden of proof" means that someone suggesting a new theory or stating a claim must provide evidence to support it: it is not sufficient to say, "you can't disprove this". [/quote]

The Flat Earth theory pre-dates the  Round Earth theory by centuries. The burden of proof is on you to prove your theory.

?

GeoGuy

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #17 on: November 02, 2006, 02:10:39 PM »
Quote from: "bibicul"


What I posted is pure logic; I have no idea how you will refute it. thebeasts's reply is a waste of time in my opinion and a pathetic attempt to shift attention to unimportant details; GeoGuy's posts simply make no sense and I honestly don't read them anymore fully, while EnragedPenguin is asking me to waste time linking posts that common visitors on this website know exist. I am not answering to such rubbish.


I asked you to provide some actual posts where a FE used the debating method you described, as I have simply not seen any and do not believe any actually exist.
What you posted is only "pure logic" if the FE's actually use that debating method, which they don't.

And if Bibicul decides that this post is simply too dense and confusing to wade through, would someone kindly explain to him what was said here.

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #18 on: November 02, 2006, 02:23:34 PM »
Quote
The burden of proof is on you to provide examples of real quotes, not random statements you made up.


Mate, this is pathetic. I am not going to go back and read hundreds of old posts to paste quotes for you and, after I do that, to be told that "You can't prove there isn't a government conspiracy" (written by some FE'er in reply to a post asking why you think there is a conspiracy) actually doesn't mean what it says it means. I'm sure that curious investigators will go back and check for themselves, not ask me to be their errand boy and paste quotes. And believe me, they will find what I'm talking about; you already know this and you're honestly just wasting my time and yours. I don't want / need to paste anything. Sorry.

Quote
The Flat Earth theory pre-dates the Round Earth theory by centuries. The burden of proof is on you to prove your theory.


Unfortunately for you, we already did; if you recall from middle school, at some point of time everyone thought that the earth was flat (yes, I know it's hard to believe). However, a bunch of very smart men came about and took upon them the burden of proof (that the earth was round). In time, they swayed others to agree with them, proved that the earth was round and, when men were deployed into space, they brought back confirmation of a round earth. Now, if you don't want to accept this as evidence, that is fine with me (I really don't care what you believe and that's why the burden of proof doesn't lie with me. All I want is for people to know what I think - I'm sure the more realistic ones will believe my thread when they read it, that's why I will keep it updated). However, while we might have fake photos of a round earth, you have nothing. Also, the FE "theory" that you present today is based on different assumptions than 2500 years ago. "Antarctica doesn't exist", "There's a gov't conspiracy" and "The pictures are fake" stand at the basis of modern FE'ism an did not exist then (obviously). Your theory is practically new; RE theory precedes it by far. The space photos only confirmed what was already known. RE theory hasn't changed in ages => the burden of proof is with you.

?

GeoGuy

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #19 on: November 02, 2006, 02:34:29 PM »
Quote from: "bibicul"

Mate, this is pathetic. I am not going to go back and read hundreds of old posts to paste quotes for you and, after I do that, to be told that "You can't prove there isn't a government conspiracy" (written by some FE'er in reply to a post asking why you think there is a conspiracy) actually doesn't mean what it says it means. I'm sure that curious investigators will go back and check for themselves, not ask me to be their errand boy and paste quotes. And believe me, they will find what I'm talking about; you already know this and you're honestly just wasting my time and yours. I don't want / need to paste anything. Sorry.


Ah but you see, without providing any evidence whatsoever for a single one of your claims it's going to be difficult for people to accept them. You can't simply make a statement like "FE's say x." Without actually proving that FE's really do say x. It just doesn't work that way.

Using this brand of "pure logic" (which is, like, a thousand times better than regular logic, for those of you who didn't already know) I can pretty much say whatever I want and never have to worry about anyone refuting me. Simply because I never gave them anything to refute.

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #20 on: November 02, 2006, 02:45:44 PM »
Quote
Ah but you see, without providing any evidence whatsoever for a single one of your claims it's going to be difficult for people to accept them.


How ironic mate... you never thought about that when you read claims of a flat earth, did you? Instead, you just believed them? Yes, looks like you did  :D . When you are unable to bring evidence to back up such a... bold statement, why should i go around finding quotes for the likes of you - quotes which can be found on this forum? If you read my post again, you will see that I bring evidence. It's on www.wikipedia.com, a website known to publish rather objective pieces. Where is your evidence? In some book written by an eccentric English inventor, Samuel Birley Rowbotham (1816-1884)?

I don't need to prove anything to you. You want to find your evidence? Read all the threads in this forum and you will find your proof. All I want is for people to read a powerful statement which you were thus far unable to deny.

?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #21 on: November 02, 2006, 02:49:29 PM »
Bibicul, you can't possibly be serious about this.
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #22 on: November 02, 2006, 02:51:31 PM »
k im off to read every single thread! see u guys in about a year or two

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #23 on: November 02, 2006, 02:52:51 PM »
Quote
Bibicul, you can't possibly be serious about this.


Well, it looks as though most RE'ers who read this were pretty serious about it, or so says my mailbox filled with "good job!", "let's see what they reply to this one" and a few other positive comments. I also notice that a few people posted their opinion in this very thread, agreeing with me. I don't see where the problem is. It's all very straight-forward and logical. No conspiracy, seriously.

?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #24 on: November 02, 2006, 02:56:28 PM »
Quote from: "bibicul"
Well, it looks as though most RE'ers who read this were pretty serious about it, or so says my mailbox filled with "good job!", "let's see what they reply to this one" and a few other positive comments.


So you fooled them too, huh? I almost believed you were serious, up until the point where I read your second post.
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.

?

GeoGuy

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #25 on: November 02, 2006, 02:58:08 PM »
Quote from: "bibicul"

How ironic mate... you never thought about that when you read claims of a flat earth, did you? Instead, you just believed them? Yes, looks like you did  :D ...


Looks can be deceiving.

Quote
I don't need to prove anything to you. You want to find your evidence? Read all the threads in this forum and you will find your proof. All I want is for people to read a powerful statement which you were thus far unable to deny.


I have read most of the threads in general discussion at one time or another, and I have never seen a FE use the debating method you described.

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #26 on: November 02, 2006, 02:59:06 PM »
EnragedPenguin said:
Quote
So you fooled them too, huh? I almost believed you were serious, up until the point where I read your second post.


You are deviating from the topic and honestly, I am in no mood to talk to you about anything else other than what I posted. Sorry mate. Good night.

GeoGuy said:
Quote
I have read most of the threads in general discussion at one time or another, and I have never seen a FE use the debating method you described.


Maybe you should read them more carefully. Good luck!

?

GeoGuy

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #27 on: November 02, 2006, 03:09:14 PM »
Quote from: "bibicul"

Maybe you should read them more carefully. Good luck!


I have no reason to go back and re-read them since, because you've offered no evidence to support your claims, I have no reason to believe they even exist. You however, do have a reason to read through them and find the posts you referred to. So why you simply refuse to support your argument is beyond me.

"FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #28 on: November 02, 2006, 03:50:43 PM »
I definitely understand what you're saying, and I can definitely see why you interpreted some of their answers that way, but I don't agree.

Was that contradictory? Probably.
he earth is a giant frisbee being thrown around the universe by George Bush and Zeus.

*

Dioptimus Drime

  • 4531
  • Meep.
Re: "FE'ISM" DOES NOT WORK
« Reply #29 on: November 02, 2006, 06:23:41 PM »
Quote from: "bibicul"

In most debates with FE’ers (such as Erasmus, GeoGuy, thebeast and many, many others), such negative proof is encountered somewhere, for example in statements such as “there is a government conspiracy because there is no proof that there isn’t a government cospiracy”, “the ice wall exists because you cannot prove that it doesn’t”, “photos taken from space have been falsified because there is no proof that they haven’t been falsified”, or even “the earth is flat because you cannot prove that it isn’t”. As stated above, negative proof can also have the form "How come you think there is a government conspiracy?" to which they respond "Well, how come you think that there isn't one?", etc.

You're totally misconstruing this. We're not claiming that the world exists. Everyone knows that. We're claiming the shape of the world that already exists. That way, it's not saying "it exists because you can't prove that it doesn't." Pretty simple right there. The negative logic works because of the understated thing on The Burden of Proof, which might as well have been part of the first 'analysis.'

Quote

FE’ers claim that the burden of proof lies of RE’ers, or “the accusers”. This is false. Please note that “outside a legal context, "burden of proof" means that someone suggesting a new theory or stating a claim must provide evidence to support it: it is not sufficient to say, "you can't disprove this". Specifically, when anyone is making a bold claim, it is not someone else's responsibility to disprove the claim, but is rather the person's responsibility who is making the bold claim to prove it”. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof). If that wording proves too difficult for FE’ers, then here is a simpler explanation: “The less reasonable a statement seems, the more proof it requires” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof).

Well that's just stupid. What's the standard for a "bold claim." Since we're a society of a bunch of people who believe that the Earth is flat, and YOU come HERE to tell us that it's not, I'd say you're the one making a "bold claim." No matter HOW much you pretend that you don't have to tell us anything, the fact of the matter is that you do.


Quote

There are 2 conclusions that can be drawn from the analysis presented above:
    1) Since FE’ers use logical falacies (in the form of negative proofs) in their arguments, and since they believe that the burden of proof lies with RE’ers, their arguments automatically fail. In other words, nobody needs to disprove anything in the FE “theory” since it hasn’t even been proved.

Well, theoretically, if we were to disprove the RE theory (which is pretty damned easy), then the FE theory is the next theory on the chopping block, and unless you can prove some other shape of the Earth, it looks like if we demolish the RE theory, then the FE theory is the only logical theory there, and therefore must be the correct one. So, whatever you're going on about with the "logical fallacies," it still does work. Just in a 'round about way.

Quote

   2) The only way that the FE “theory” can become a theory is if FE’ers find other ways to argue, for example by providing evidence for their claims (rather than saying “there is a government conspiracy because there is no proof that there isn’t a government cospiracy”).

It's a theory because it's a belief with scientific evidence that isn't proven yet. That's exactly what a theory is.

By the way, I like how your only source is Wikipedia (a publicly editable site). What an excellent way to pretend that you know what you're talking about. ;)
Congrats on your highly successful thread.


~D-Draw