You, speak "good old falsifiability",
but Flat Earth Theory is not falsifiable as any evidence against it, not personally verifiable, is by definition deemed fake evidence.
When that's the case, then congrats, you can point out said unfalsifiability and the subsequent fact that it isn't a scientific theory. Though that's rarely the case because there are plenty of experiments that can be done with respect to various FE models that could be used as arguments, from the ISS, to the whole thread on denpressure a while back, you could probably pull off JRowe's DE experiment on a plane trip...
You just do not get the point. Most flat earthers, especially those on YouTube, believe that there is a
gobal conspiracy to cover up the true shape of the earth.
Look up "Place of the Conspiracy in FET" in "the Wiki"
and find that any
personally unverifiable evidence that contradicts the FET must be fabricated!
THE FLAT EARTH Wiki, Place of the Conspiracy in FET.Many might ridicule that thought, but all you need to do is look at their response to evidence
It would seem that they start from the point, "The earth looks flat, therefore the earth is flat".
Then all observations and evidence simply have to be bent to that end.
As just one example, look at
Silicon in say
Calculate the height & distance to the sun on the flat earth using angle only « on: October 25, 2017, 07:58:50 AM ».
He starts with the assumption that "The sun never 'sets' on a flat earth. It goes out of view due to perspective. To calculate the height of the sun, you need to use the below math to take this fact into account".
Then, rather than accept that
light travels in essentially straight lines, he proceeds to "invent" a totally artificial calculation that essentially forces the sun to be exactly 5000 km above the earth.
You might say that we need to prove that
light travels in essentially straight lines, but it would be totally impossible to take every debate right back basics like that. In any case, I cannot personally prove that light travels in
light travels in essentially straight lines over a thousand kilometres.
That is just one case, but there are many other similar ones about the sunrises and sunsets.
Ski used to claim that there was no separate "globe physics" and "flat earth physics", but that is certainly not true. Flat earthers simply do not accept the well proven basic concepts of physics - in many cases not even the basic laws of motion or atoms and molecules.
Actually discussion points a hell of a lot more interesting than the tedious nonsense of "Get me a photo of this random thing which would be nigh-impossible to get and I wouldn't accept it even if you did!" and the like.
Sure it is!
But who are the ones asking "Get me a photo of this random thing which would be nigh-impossible to get and I wouldn't accept it even if you did!"?
Have you ever tried to have a real discussion with a flat earther? In most cases you seem to be explaining the basis of their hypotheses to us ignorant globularists.
Then take a look at the thread "Does gravity exist", say after
Does gravity exist « Reply #6 on: October 27, 2017, 03:54:09 PM ».
Most of the discussion was with long standing flat-earther,
th3rm0m3t3r0, whose basic answer is "No, gravity doesn't exist".
Evidence, both written and video, fails to elicit much more than:
So repeat those experiments and bend space time in your basement. Shouldn't be too hard.
But we know full well that my doing those experiments would mean nothing, they would only be meaningful if done by
th3rm0m3t3r0, himself. But no flat earther seems willing to do experiments that might falsify their belief.
They will do their
balloon flights, come up with photos like the one on the left and claim "look no curvature:!
121,000ft Little Piggy High Altitude Balloon Flight FULL LENGTH FLAT EARTH ADDICT 06 at 0.00 | | 
121,000ft Little Piggy High Altitude Balloon Flight FULL LENGTH FLAT EARTH ADDICT 06 at 6.09 | | 
121,000ft Little Piggy High Altitude Balloon Flight FULL LENGTH FLAT EARTH ADDICT 06 at 6.34 |
Sure, no curvature from their camera with plenty of "barrel distortion", but at 6:09 in the same video there is vastly roo much curvature. A lens with "barrel distortion" will give a reasonably undistorted image near the optical centre and 6:34 we see this, with about the expected curvature.
New member,
defender_of_truth, made a thread on lens correction,
high altitude balloon photos, barrel distortion, and guess what?
No response from any flat earther or anyone else, other than myself!
Flat earthers are not interested in any evidence that might dispove their hypothesis.
But so what? I don't know about you but I tend to hold RET to a higher standard than FET.
So, Jane, I do not see it as the plaything that you seem to. This place is a "little haven" from the hatred engendered by flat earth supporters "at large".
Yes, 'at large,' what percentage of the world would you say actually accept FET?
I have no idea, but some here have claimed the newspaper pols in the UK suggest that 37% might believe the earth flat.
And for that matter, so what, what do you think the terrible arguments and vitriol that get thrown at FEers achieve beyond getting them to dig their heels in?
The big problem is that groups like this often have much more influence than their numbers suggest.
It is not the belief in a flat earth itself that is the problem.
The really big deal is the promotion of the idea that all science is bad and part of a "scientism cult".
As a result, this has engendered a real hatred of NASA and all "space agencies" and they are promoted are evil entities hiding the real shape of the earth from the ignorant masses.
You're not exactly in any position to take the moral high ground.
Well, I and many others try but
all you seem to do is try to white ant our efforts.
But, with some like
sceptimatic and
JRoweSkeptic, as soon as a contrary position is presented there are accusation of
indoctrination or
failure to understand the theory thown around.
Ever tried to present a case for
Newtonian Gravitation, with evidence, to
Sceppy or argue that stars cannot be simply hot meta and rock with
JRoweSkeptic?
You might think
sceptimatic's hypotheses are interesting, but if you look further you will find those ideas are quite widespread.
The problem is not I believe the fault of "the flat earth movement", that along with so many other similar beliefs is only a symptom of a deep malaise in the education systems.
I tried to give my thoughts in,
Science has failed to teach the Heliocentric model. « Reply #20 on: September 04, 2017, 12:29:16 PM ».
You talk about, the "vitriol that get thrown at FEers achieve beyond getting them to dig their heels in?" Where?
In any case, I know full well, that in most cases even ratyional arguments will make
believers "dig their heels in", that's human nature.
I do not write to convince
believers, I write in the, probably vain, hope that some "guests" or some not yet convinced of the FE might see the fallacies in it.
If you think that we are doing it the wrong way, then you show us how it should be done!