Many Rebuttals to Flat Earth Hypothesises.

  • 35 Replies
  • 11833 Views
?

inquisitive

  • 5108
  • +0/-0
Re: Many Rebuttals to Flat Earth Hypothesises.
« Reply #30 on: August 27, 2014, 12:56:54 PM »
Also, #6 was requested to be discussed, so let's do that.
Stratellites and Pseudolites can perform the same functions as your satellites supposedly do.
Read the links, one is not deployed and the other has a limited function.

Please explain how we get live news reports from war zones.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2014, 12:58:47 PM by inquisitive »

?

Blacksmith

  • 113
  • +0/-0
  • Debunker of Debauchery
Re: Many Rebuttals to Flat Earth Hypothesises.
« Reply #31 on: August 28, 2014, 07:19:25 AM »
So, we've disproven a flat earth three times over, care to take another crack at it?
Tally Count of Every Piece of Evidence for a Flat Earth, Ever:

*

JimmyTheCrab

  • 10340
  • +0/-5
Re: Many Rebuttals to Flat Earth Hypothesises.
« Reply #32 on: August 28, 2014, 08:45:51 AM »
These pseudolites and stratolites are real communication utilities
Actually, "Stratellite" is a brand name for a product that has been vapourware for years now.  All they have managed so far is a mock up.  It started to look like bullshit some time ago.

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.

?

nope

  • 1
  • +0/-0
Re: Many Rebuttals to Flat Earth Hypothesises.
« Reply #33 on: August 28, 2014, 04:01:29 PM »
I am proposing that it is the composition of the Earth that affects the amount of UA Force that permeates it.  This is, in fact, the definition of a theory.

This is in no way whatsoever a theory.  This is a hypothesis, which is the FIRST step of the scientific method.  A theory is developed after empirical evidence supports your hypothesis through testing and observation.  This is not, as it may seem, a debate in semantics, but instead a post to point out the main flaw in your arguments.  Your arguments are guesses.  A round Earth has been scientifically proven (thanks Magellan).  You really have no idea how to support your theory.  In this sense, the FE idea can be treated as religion, which is what humanity imagines in order to explain the unknown. 

Instead to choose that there is a worldwide conspiracy that has no financial, political, or social benefit.  The absolute core flaw of the of the RE conspiracy is that it makes no sense for REers to have such a conspiracy.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • 37800
  • +1/-0
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Many Rebuttals to Flat Earth Hypothesises.
« Reply #34 on: August 28, 2014, 04:42:27 PM »
the·o·ry noun \ˈthē-ə-rē, ˈthir-ē\
: an idea or set of ideas that is intended to explain facts or events

: an idea that is suggested or presented as possibly true but that is not known or proven to be true

: the general principles or ideas that relate to a particular subject

Also, Magellan died half way around his trip.  How did he prove that the Earth is round? 

?

Blacksmith

  • 113
  • +0/-0
  • Debunker of Debauchery
Re: Many Rebuttals to Flat Earth Hypothesises.
« Reply #35 on: August 28, 2014, 05:43:24 PM »
The definition of theory is different in science.

Theories that are accepted by scientists have been repeatedly tested by experiments and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

So, unless you're 'theory' is not scientific in nature, it is not a theory, it is a hypothesis.
Tally Count of Every Piece of Evidence for a Flat Earth, Ever: