Question for Homeschooling parents flat-earth style

Quote from: Humble_Scientist on November 29, 2015, 03:56:35 PM

Quote from: frenat on November 28, 2015, 07:52:25 PM

Quote from: Humble_Scientist on November 28, 2015, 07:44:49 PM

Quote from: frenat on November 28, 2015, 06:02:23 PM

Why would you think people here should know right off hand what that is on the pic?

So, you do not know what is in the pictures. At last...
 

That's your response to that entire post?  Really?  Are you trying to look like a troll?

I answered honestly.  Would you prefer I make stuff up like you?

Dear Frenat, I truly appreciate your honesty. What you have so honestly written explains everything. Perhaps, for some reason you simply do not know or are not able to understand what is in the pictures and what does it mean.

Let me explain that to you. Look what you have written:

"Why would you think people here should know right off hand what that is on the pic? Do you think any of us work with the Hubble?"

So, you apparently suppose that only people who "work with the Hubble" should know what is on the pics.

No, I think they would be the most qualified to know.  IF you really wanted to know what it was you would ask them.  But you don't really want to know, do you?

snip irrelevance...

Quote from: Humble_Scientist on November 29, 2015, 03:56:35 PM

Or another example. What do you see in the following picture? It was recently discussed in this branch:  http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64959.msg1732829#msg1732829

 

What I instantly saw were the obvious traces of a recent rain. A decent rain. Just look at those sandy spots and you see apparent traces left by recent streams of water. What I would say is:

Much like you do not have to work with the Hubble to see that those pictures are fake, -

you do not have to build a "rover" and a "spaceship" and send the "rover" to Mars to see that this NASA picture is fake. It can not be Mars, in RE terms. 'Cause (if I am not mistaken) the last rain on Mars, according to RE theory, happened about a billion years ago or so.

Do you understand that or you are going to defend that (c)NASA "rover" picture, too?

Point out the evidence of rain.  edit a pic with marks pointing to it and post it.  Can you think of anything else that can cause those marks?   Is your theory falsifiable?  Why is it YOU can easily spot it but those with years of training in Geology do not?  Perhaps we should all go to the "Humble Scientist" school of Geology because apparently you know everything!   

you see, I don't see channels where water has flowed.  I don't see the loose soil more gathered in low areas but it appears to be evenly distributed among the picture with lines of pebbles that appear to be exposed by wind.  I don't see vegetation or insects either.  But I could be wrong and am DESPERATELY waiting for your annotated picture.  Unlike some people I don't assume I'm right before I start.

I second this request.

Truth does not have an expiration date. 

You're right. It doesn't.

What really needs to be done is to finally determine Earth shape and keep all relevant considerations open with ongoing research until that time when the truth is exposed.

And that was done and settled hundreds of years ago. If you disagree, find some actual unambiguous evidence that the Earth is not spheroidal to reopen the argument. Good luck!

Quote from: gotham on November 28, 2015, 01:04:07 PM

Truth does not have an expiration date. 

You're right. It doesn't.

Actually, sometimes it does.

Research participation is required to prove/disprove FET/RET. Ambiguity is rooted within the core of the scientific method and its inclusion of hypothesis testing. It can never fully reach and cross the threshold of truth. The same cannot be said of FET evidence.

The time line of FET verification is longer than that of RET and is unbroken because of FET source methodology superiority, notwithstanding RET’s intrusion of a few hundred years resulting in a temporary aberration of Earth shape reality. 

Research participation is required to prove/disprove FET/RET.

There's that "prove" word again. Ain't gonna happen,as our esteemed administrator has also noted.

Ambiguity is rooted within the core of the scientific method and its inclusion of hypothesis testing. It can never fully reach and cross the threshold of truth. The same cannot be said of FET evidence.

That sounds profound, but really says nothing. Is there any real evidence that the Earth is flat? There's plenty that it's spherical.

The time line of FET verification is longer than that of RET and is unbroken because of FET source methodology superiority^{[Citation needed]}, notwithstanding RET’s intrusion of a few hundred years resulting in a temporary aberration of Earth shape reality.

Easy to claim, harder to show. Watcha got?

Quote from: gotham on November 30, 2015, 01:32:24 PM

Research participation is required to prove/disprove FET/RET.

There's that "prove" word again. Ain't gonna happen,as our esteemed administrator has also noted.

Quote

Ambiguity is rooted within the core of the scientific method and its inclusion of hypothesis testing. It can never fully reach and cross the threshold of truth. The same cannot be said of FET evidence.

That sounds profound, but really says nothing. Is there any real evidence that the Earth is flat? There's plenty that it's spherical.

Quote

The time line of FET verification is longer than that of RET and is unbroken because of FET source methodology superiority^{[Citation needed]}, notwithstanding RET’s intrusion of a few hundred years resulting in a temporary aberration of Earth shape reality.

Easy to claim, harder to show. Watcha got?

When "prove/disprove" are used in this context it creates a continuum challenging you to set your point on the line, in this case, between FET and RET you feel you can defend as a truth.  Face it, the Earth is something regardless of what you believe.  Also, participation requires one to get outside the lab where experiences are not in the hypothetical realm.

In an Earth shape debate between FET and RET, one or the other will provide a higher grade of available evidence that helps to support its claim. Let it be said it is not RET winning the debate.     

In an Earth shape debate between FET and RET, one or the other will provide a higher grade of available evidence that helps to support its claim.

Well, OK, then. I guess we're done. The Earth is spherical. The FE camp has yet to produce *anything* either unequivocal or plausible, let alone both.

Let it be said it is not RET winning the debate.^{[Citation needed]}   

You never addressed this:

Is there any real evidence that the Earth is flat? There's plenty that it's spherical.

We can start with sunrise and sunset if you're still unconvinced and move on from there.

Or this:

Quote from: gotham on November 30, 2015, 01:32:24 PM

The time line of FET verification is longer than that of RET and is unbroken because of FET source methodology superiority^{[Citation needed]}, notwithstanding RET’s intrusion of a few hundred years resulting in a temporary aberration of Earth shape reality.

Easy to claim, harder to show. Watcha got?

Anything at all? Other than bluster, that is? All you've done so far is claim you're winning and ignored direct questions and requests for details. Can you offer more than empty words?

I am a homeschooling mother of four. I stumbled into all this from being a vaccine truth activist. Whenever I see these posts about how an informed parent is "ignorant" for not following the programming of big pharma, I have to yawn. Really?

OK, Vaccinators! You got me! My kids are ridiculously healthy and developmentally "ahead" (miles ahead) of their same aged peers. I guess we should switch to your way in case my kids get the dreaded measles.

Anyway, original poster, I'd love to chat with you sometime. My strategy has been to be really open with my children about what we (their parents) are experiencing as we become aware of all the lies. My children have always been critical of television programming. We frequently invite discussion over controversial points. My children don't always agree, and we must trust that they will be critical and skeptical enough to figure things out for themselves. I figure they have a significant headstart from where their dad and I began.

We always encourage the children to trust and develop their intuition. I actually think that one of the most important points of teaching and programming a globe is to force people to turn away from their instincts and the cause them to lose touch with their own senses.

Whatever way you choose, will be great! Blessings to you and to all,

Jean

We always encourage the children to trust and develop their intuition. I actually think that one of the most important points of teaching and programming a globe is to force people to turn away from their instincts and the cause them to lose touch with their own senses.

have u ever think that intuitions can be wrong?
do u know that human senses are all but perfect and that can trick u into perceive something wrong or non existent?

I am a homeschooling mother of four. I stumbled into all this from being a vaccine truth activist. Whenever I see these posts about how an informed parent is "ignorant" for not following the programming of big pharma, I have to yawn. Really?

OK, Vaccinators! You got me! My kids are ridiculously healthy and developmentally "ahead" (miles ahead) of their same aged peers. I guess we should switch to your way in case my kids get the dreaded measles.

Anyway, original poster, I'd love to chat with you sometime. My strategy has been to be really open with my children about what we (their parents) are experiencing as we become aware of all the lies. My children have always been critical of television programming. We frequently invite discussion over controversial points. My children don't always agree, and we must trust that they will be critical and skeptical enough to figure things out for themselves. I figure they have a significant headstart from where their dad and I began.

We always encourage the children to trust and develop their intuition. I actually think that one of the most important points of teaching and programming a globe is to force people to turn away from their instincts and the cause them to lose touch with their own senses.

Whatever way you choose, will be great! Blessings to you and to all,

Jean

1. This will lead to a lot of "reinventing the wheel" scenarios. Of course you should always be critical, but you should not criticize for the sake of being critical. Also, you sound so pessimistic. Also, what type of lies are you talking about anyways?

2.

There is no connection between autism and vaccines. It's stupid and ignorant parents who spread lies on parents forums.
Also, do you know how vaccine works even? Because too many people do not know. Vaccine is a dead pice of the germ that causes the disease. It is just like getting the disease, except it doesn't spread or do anything. It is dead, and just lies there whilst your immune system studies it and build antibodies. Once you get the actual disease the antibodies know how ot fight the disease. Not vaccinating yourself means that from the beginning you have no antibodies against it. Your immune system will have it's hands full trying to fight off the germ inefficiently as the germ wreaks havoc in your body. Analyzing the germ and creating the right antibody takes a lot of time. Vaccines help you prepare a cure against the disease before you get it. IT does not entirely prevent the disease (but it is a lot more effective than you think). It does however pretty much entirely prevent further spread of the disease (from a person), so fever people get sick in total. And because of the vaccine, the body usually defeats the flu BEFORE it can hurt any internal organs, as all vaccines do.
"The flu sucks, but no one dies from the flu. It is the side effects, lung fluids mostly." Is a statement of ignorance. In that context, no disease ever is lethal. Lethal diseases are so dangerous BECAUSE they cause these side effects, and the quicker your body defeats the disease, the smaller is the chance that any organs get damaged. Vaccines prepares ready-to-use antibodies, the quickest way to defeat a disease. Also, NO VACCINE EVER reduces fever. That is a lie.

Also, statistics is against you. A vaccined population suffers far less deaths AND incubations from diseases (both naturally caused and accidental by vaccines) than an unvaccinated population. Doctors very much DO know what they are doing with vaccines. Why else would any government fund vaccination if it doesn't work?