Let's go do an experiment

Alright everyone I have a pretty good idea. The earth is flat now apparently, so what if everyone reading this grabs his/her handy dandy smartphone and takes a picture of the edge? If the earth is flat, you could just pick a direction and walk. And about the whole ice wall thing (don't even get me started on how bullshit that is), if that stops you for some reason, go and take a picture of the ice wall. Let's see what is actually provable: hundreds of years of scientific evidence, or this idiocy.

and yes, i do know this is just what bill nye said

If the earth is flat, you could just pick a direction and walk.

Great. I drowned. What next?

And about the whole ice wall thing (don't even get me started on how bullshit that is), if that stops you for some reason, go and take a picture of the ice wall. Let's see what is actually provable: hundreds of years of scientific evidence, or this idiocy.

Quote

And about the whole ice wall thing (don't even get me started on how bullshit that is), if that stops you for some reason, go and take a picture of the ice wall. Let's see what is actually provable: hundreds of years of scientific evidence, or this idiocy.

That's a pretty small wall. People will easily get over it.

Quote from: Jane on November 04, 2017, 04:44:02 PM

Quote

And about the whole ice wall thing (don't even get me started on how bullshit that is), if that stops you for some reason, go and take a picture of the ice wall. Let's see what is actually provable: hundreds of years of scientific evidence, or this idiocy.

That's a pretty small wall. People will easily get over it.

It also appears to only be a few hundred feet long, instead of tens of thousands of miles. I'd like to see a photo of at least a good unbroken segment of that tens of thousands of miles long, 150ft high, impenetrable wall of ice

Quote from: JackBlack on November 04, 2017, 06:15:58 PM

Quote from: Jane on November 04, 2017, 04:44:02 PM

Quote

And about the whole ice wall thing (don't even get me started on how bullshit that is), if that stops you for some reason, go and take a picture of the ice wall. Let's see what is actually provable: hundreds of years of scientific evidence, or this idiocy.

That's a pretty small wall. People will easily get over it.

Oh, sorry.

It also appears to only be a few hundred feet long, instead of tens of thousands of miles. I'd like to see a photo of at least a good unbroken segment of that tens of thousands of miles long, 150ft high, impenetrable wall of ice

...You want a photo of tens of thousands of miles? Sure, if you want to be far enough away that you can see that much of it:

Oh, sorry.

A wall of unknown height, with the known height section being quite small.
I think we can still make it, but I would need to see more of it to be sure.
Could you ask your camera crew to pan the camera up a bit to get an idea of how high the wall is?

...You want a photo of tens of thousands of miles? Sure, if you want to be far enough away that you can see that much of it:

Or take a picture side on, showing the wall starting at you and stretching as far as the eye can see.
Something kind of like this:

Could you ask your camera crew to pan the camera up a bit to get an idea of how high the wall is?

Sure, next time I take a trip to Antarctica.

Or take a picture side on, showing the wall starting at you and stretching as far as the eye can see.

Sure. Apologies for the camera distortion.

Sure. Apologies for the camera distortion.

So an image with no indication of scale at all, and no sign of a giant wall.
Just a whiter area.

Don't worry, I found a better version:

Still no indication of scale though, so it might be tiny.

Also, not a flat top, so the ice isn't sublimating so not too high.

Don't worry, I found a better version:

Well that's clearly digitally edited, unlike mine.
You don't need much of an indication of height when it's viewed from far enough away to see all that.

Can we at least start calling it by the correct name? It's called an ice shelf. Here are some more relevant photos I've found.













I know a few climbers, and nothing would motivate them more than being told, "you can't climb that".

Can we at least start calling it by the correct name? It's called an ice shelf. Here are some more relevant photos I've found.













I know a few climbers, and nothing would motivate them more than being told, "you can't climb that".

No, No, No.
We are talking about an ICE WALL. It is a continuous wall of ice, 150 feet high, and 78,000 miles in circumference, encircling the whole flat earth ! Rowbotham said so, so it must be so !

Quote from: JackBlack on November 04, 2017, 09:55:41 PM

Don't worry, I found a better version:

Well that's clearly digitally edited, unlike mine.
You don't need much of an indication of height when it's viewed from far enough away to see all that.

Please provide us with prove that the photo is digital edited and your posted photo not.
Did you travel yourself to the Antarctica?

Also how can you photo exist as it is claimed that a massive fleat is protecting that Antarctica and no one can reach the Antarctica?

Can we at least start calling it by the correct name? It's called an ice shelf.

I mean, yeah, that's kinda the whole point. What photo of an ice wall do you want that you couldn't pass off as an ice shelf?

Quote from: defender_of_truth on November 05, 2017, 05:32:21 AM

Can we at least start calling it by the correct name? It's called an ice shelf.

I mean, yeah, that's kinda the whole point. What photo of an ice wall do you want that you couldn't pass off as an ice shelf?

What kind of pictures do you have?
If you have some, do you than confirm that the fleat of ships to protect the Antarctica does not exist?

What kind of pictures do you have?

Plenty, you have to be clear about what you're actually looking for.

If you have some, do you than confirm that the fleat of ships to protect the Antarctica does not exist?

Actually it's not ships, there are submarines.

Quote from: Canadabear on November 05, 2017, 11:03:20 AM

What kind of pictures do you have?

Plenty, you have to be clear about what you're actually looking for.

Quote

If you have some, do you than confirm that the fleat of ships to protect the Antarctica does not exist?

Actually it's not ships, there are submarines.

Than they do a very bad job as there are so much photos that you claim prove the complete ice wall at the Antarctica.

Than they do a very bad job as there are so much photos that you claim prove the complete ice wall at the Antarctica.

You're starting to get it, well done.
Do you see how utterly pointless this whole subject of discussion is yet?

Quote from: Canadabear on November 05, 2017, 11:16:03 AM

Than they do a very bad job as there are so much photos that you claim prove the complete ice wall at the Antarctica.

You're starting to get it, well done.
Do you see how utterly pointless this whole subject of discussion is yet?

You are right, because all claims of the big fleat and the ice wall are pointless because expeditions have proven them wrong.

Quote from: Jane on November 05, 2017, 11:22:53 AM

Quote from: Canadabear on November 05, 2017, 11:16:03 AM

Than they do a very bad job as there are so much photos that you claim prove the complete ice wall at the Antarctica.

You're starting to get it, well done.
Do you see how utterly pointless this whole subject of discussion is yet?

You are right, because all claims of the big fleat and the ice wall are pointless because expeditions have proven them wrong.

So close, and yet so far. You almost drew a logical conclusion, but instead you had to snap back to assuring everyone that "RET, RET, RET! Did I mention RET?"
We all know you're a REer, we all know you accept RET, so do I, but not every argument made for RET is a good one and not every post you make has to insist that RET is true.

Quote from: Canadabear on November 05, 2017, 11:28:19 AM

Quote from: Jane on November 05, 2017, 11:22:53 AM

Quote from: Canadabear on November 05, 2017, 11:16:03 AM

Than they do a very bad job as there are so much photos that you claim prove the complete ice wall at the Antarctica.

You're starting to get it, well done.
Do you see how utterly pointless this whole subject of discussion is yet?

You are right, because all claims of the big fleat and the ice wall are pointless because expeditions have proven them wrong.

So close, and yet so far. You almost drew a logical conclusion, but instead you had to snap back to assuring everyone that "RET, RET, RET! Did I mention RET?"
We all know you're a REer, we all know you accept RET, so do I, but not every argument made for RET is a good one and not every post you make has to insist that RET is true.

And you are somebody that repeats claims that have not one little bit of evidence to be possible in reality.

And all that repeating and your additional claim that you not even believe thus claims as you said you are not a FEIB

And you are somebody that repeats claims that have not one little bit of evidence to be possible in reality.

And all that repeating and your additional claim that you not even believe thus claims as you said you are not a FEIB

It is possible to argue poorly for the correct point of view. All I'm doing is pointing that out.

Quote from: Canadabear on November 05, 2017, 11:43:55 AM

And you are somebody that repeats claims that have not one little bit of evidence to be possible in reality.

And all that repeating and your additional claim that you not even believe thus claims as you said you are not a FEIB

It is possible to argue poorly for the correct point of view. All I'm doing is pointing that out.

No you are only repeating claims of FEIB.
That are poorly argues for a wrong point.

Why do you not pointing out the flaws in the FEI?
What good is an idea that has no evidence to work in reality.

No you are only repeating claims of FEIB.
That are poorly argues for a wrong point.

They're arguing better than you are at the moment.

Why do you not pointing out the flaws in the FEI?
What good is an idea that has no evidence to work in reality.

I do sometimes, but plenty of people have that covered.

Quote from: JackBlack on November 04, 2017, 09:55:41 PM

Don't worry, I found a better version:

Well that's clearly digitally edited, unlike mine.
You don't need much of an indication of height when it's viewed from far enough away to see all that.

Yes you do.
It could still be quite small.
There is also no indication of length, so how much is "all that" and "far enough away"?

I mean, yeah, that's kinda the whole point. What photo of an ice wall do you want that you couldn't pass off as an ice shelf?

One which is extremely tall, like a few km tall, as clearly visible by a scale on it (such as a person or a large ship), with it still going up and up and up.

Even better, get photos which can be unambiguously stitched together to produce a long continuous wall.

Quote from: Canadabear on November 05, 2017, 11:28:19 AM

You are right, because all claims of the big fleat and the ice wall are pointless because expeditions have proven them wrong.

So close, and yet so far. You almost drew a logical conclusion, but instead you had to snap back to assuring everyone that "RET, RET, RET! Did I mention RET?"
We all know you're a REer, we all know you accept RET, so do I, but not every argument made for RET is a good one and not every post you make has to insist that RET is true.

Nope. No RET there (at least not explicitly)
REALITY! REALITY! REALITY!!!

Stop acting like appealing to reality it just appealing to RET.

Stop acting like appealing to reality it just appealing to RET.

There's a huge difference between "This is just the way things are so you're wrong," and "This, this and this indicate why you're wrong."

Quips like "Expeditions have been to Antarctica," are the former. They're appeals to RET because that's all they care about; they don't even attempt to show the actual implication (did the expeditions sail all around Antarctica? Successfully cross it? Or did they just reach one side, plonk down a flag, then wander back?), or address the simplest rebuttals a five year old could come up with (what's the evidence?)
It's appealing to things you already know, with no indication of why someone else should believe you.

To say nothing of immediately switching topics of discussion from how silly it is to ask for photos of the ice wall to expeditions to say ice wall the moment one becomes indefensible. That was more what I was criticising; the need to suddenly shout RET from the rooftops rather than admit it's possible to make a bad argument but there are plenty more things supporting RET so who cares about letting one go?

Quote from: JackBlack on November 05, 2017, 12:35:22 PM

Stop acting like appealing to reality it just appealing to RET.

There's a huge difference between "This is just the way things are so you're wrong," and "This, this and this indicate why you're wrong."

Yes. Stating expeditions have been to Antartica, and gone to the south pole, thus there is no intreprentrable ice wall surrounding Antartica is the latter.

Saying Earth is round so you are wrong is the former.

Quips like "Expeditions have been to Antarctica," are the former. They're appeals to RET because that's all they care about; they don't even attempt to show the actual implication

No. Saying Earth is round so your wrong would be the former which just uses RET.

At best you can claim their argument involved logical leaps or wasn't all spelled out.

That is not appealing to RET.

At best you can claim their argument involved logical leaps or wasn't all spelled out.

That is not appealing to RET.

Implicitly, it is. You see it all the time in posts here; arguments are founded on things that only the REer speaking holds to.
An argument can only be described as 'not all spelled out' when they've indicated that their intent actually involved spelling more out. Most of the time people seem content at leaving it at "RET, therefore RET."

How about just doing the old "distance to the horizon" and "ship passing over the horizon" experiment to prove that the earth is round or flat ?

If you just see a blur and a ship coming out of the blur and getting larger as it gets nearer (entire ship hull to masts) that proves the earth is flat.

If you see a horizon and first see just the top of the mast of the ship  and finally see the whole ship (hull to mast) as it gets nearer, that proves the earth is round.

Quote from: Jane on November 05, 2017, 11:22:53 AM

Quote from: Canadabear on November 05, 2017, 11:16:03 AM

Than they do a very bad job as there are so much photos that you claim prove the complete ice wall at the Antarctica.

You're starting to get it, well done.
Do you see how utterly pointless this whole subject of discussion is yet?

You are right, because all claims of the big fleat and the ice wall are pointless because expeditions have proven them wrong.

Just think of the immense amount of logistics to man and supply those outposts for the ice wall guards.