Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy

  • 102 Replies
  • 12119 Views
*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #60 on: December 15, 2017, 03:57:22 PM »
If you haven't done the experiment how can you claim it's not accurate???
Again
I'M NOT CLAIMING THAT!!!

Your claim:
Either it proves a round Earth or it proves the FE model is inaccurate...
My claim:
It does not prove Earth is round.

That is what you need to address.
Can you show how the experiment proves Earth is round?

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #61 on: December 15, 2017, 07:26:29 PM »
If you haven't done the experiment how can you claim it's not accurate???
Again
I'M NOT CLAIMING THAT!!!

Your claim:
Either it proves a round Earth or it proves the FE model is inaccurate...
My claim:
It does not prove Earth is round.

That is what you need to address.
Can you show how the experiment proves Earth is round?

Calculating the perimeter of a circle proves it's round. I have stated how several times. What does the experiment show??? Circumference... What is circumference??? The perimeter of a circle. Eratosthenes's experiment can be verified on a small scale and it does not work on any other shape other than a sphere, circle, globe, orb, etc....

The Greeks knew the Earth was round thousands of years ago. They wouldn't have been able to circumnavigate the globe before Christ was born if they didn't understand the World.

Stick to your claims the experiment isn't accurate without doing it. Yeah you say you didn't say that but you are... Haha You are so stupid you don't even realize I'm still baiting you... I'm a hungry troll keep feeding me haha! Dumbass like I really give a flying f*ck what you really believe, I'm just entertaining myself haha!

The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #62 on: December 15, 2017, 08:19:24 PM »
Calculating the perimeter of a circle proves it's round.
No it doesn't.
It needs to be round to calculate the perimeter.

I have stated how several times.
No you haven't. You are yet to even come close to showing how it proves it is round.

What does the experiment show???
How to calculate the circumference of Earth, ASSUMING EARTH IS ROUND!!!!
It in no way proves Earth is round.

Eratosthenes's experiment can be verified on a small scale and it does not work on any other shape other than a sphere, circle, globe, orb, etc....
No, it works fine with plenty of shapes, including a flat surface, where the angles determine the height of the sun.

The Greeks knew the Earth was round thousands of years ago.
Not because of this.

Stick to your claims the experiment isn't accurate without doing it.
Again, I have never said that. I have just said the experiment does not prove a round Earth.

I'm just entertaining myself haha!
So your a masochist that likes being beaten?

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #63 on: December 15, 2017, 09:41:15 PM »
So your whole argument amounts to "nuh-uh"...

Taking up a contradictory position doesn't proof you're right. You haven't provided any science that disproves anything I have said. I posted plenty of examples from reputable websites that confirm my statements and debunk yours.

I win you lose and we are all laughing at you...
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #64 on: December 15, 2017, 10:00:30 PM »
So your whole argument amounts to "nuh-uh"...
No, my argument is that your claim is baseless, and that the experiment (alone) did not have enough data to determine the shape of Earth.

Taking up a contradictory position doesn't proof you're right. You haven't provided any science that disproves anything I have said. I posted plenty of examples from reputable websites that confirm my statements and debunk yours.
No you haven't.
You are yet to provide a single source which shows that it proves Earth is round.
As such you have provided nothing that confirms your statement and nothing that debunks my argument.

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #65 on: December 15, 2017, 10:50:44 PM »
You prove yourself wrong haha. I'm not here to prove the Earth is round. Here's your answer Captain Coriolis...

So you have a picture of an allegedly flat horizon.
So what?
That is what you would expect for a round Earth.

The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #66 on: December 15, 2017, 11:18:58 PM »
You prove yourself wrong haha.
No I don't.
I have still shown you are full of shit.

I'm not here to prove the Earth is round.
Then fuck off.

Until you can prove how the experiment proves a round Earth, you fail.

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #67 on: December 15, 2017, 11:46:23 PM »
I care less... Therefore I'm not going outside in 17 degree weather to prove something I don't even care about to some fucktard that is so clueless that he don't even realize circumference is the perimeter of a circle... Maybe I will do it for shits and giggles on a day when it's not so bad out.

You cannot prove the experiment doesn't prove the Earth is round Captain Coriolis. You say it doesn't but the last time I checked your word wasn't worth much... I say it does, prove it doesn't...

Oh what's this???

Remember, a sphere is a 3D object, how can you show a complete sphere in a 2D picture?
We are looking at the flight track on the surface of Earth, i.e. the line the flight path traces over the surface of Earth. That does not have depth as it is limited to 2D.
following the Earth's surface, i.e. in 2D, it is straight.


 
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #68 on: December 16, 2017, 12:43:55 AM »
Marv, you are beginning to sound like a cross between Jane and Totally lacking. You are argueing a point that your opponent isn't making.

Eratosthenes' experiment calculated the circumference of a round earth. It did not proove a round earth. This is because the experiment performed exactly as he did it can be used to argue that a small sun circles a flat earth at a low altitude of about 5000 miles.

If you perform the experiment with a third point, then it gives the circumference of a round earth while totally disproving a flat earth.

Jack is simply saying Eratosthenes set out to measure the circumference of a round earth and not to disprove a flat earth. He already knew the earth was round. He assumed that right from the start. He didn't need to nor want to prove it. It was a given. Already.

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #69 on: December 16, 2017, 01:16:16 AM »
Marv, you are beginning to sound like a cross between Jane and Totally lacking. You are argueing a point that your opponent isn't making.

Eratosthenes' experiment calculated the circumference of a round earth. It did not proove a round earth. This is because the experiment performed exactly as he did it can be used to argue that a small sun circles a flat earth at a low altitude of about 5000 miles.

If you perform the experiment with a third point, then it gives the circumference of a round earth while totally disproving a flat earth.

Jack is simply saying Eratosthenes set out to measure the circumference of a round earth and not to disprove a flat earth. He already knew the earth was round. He assumed that right from the start. He didn't need to nor want to prove it. It was a given. Already.

Yeah I know it wasn't to prove the Earth was round, I said that several times. What I am saying is if he was able to correctly determine the circumference and we can do the same for ourselves, then we know the method works. If you measure circumference correctly you indirectly yet simultaneously proven an spherical shape. The way to verify which is correct is to test a RE and a FE model using a table top.

If the RE method gives the correct circumference and the FE method does not, then that proves a round sphere Earth, and disproves a round flat one, that's simple common sense.

Watch this video, this is how I will do it as the RE method, then I will lay it flat and do it like that as a FE model. Doesn't get any better than that right?

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

The way the FE method (Zetetic) is shown it will not give the correct circumference of the circle. I will do it that way and other ways to try to get a correct circumference to be fair. I build lasers I know a lot about light and how it reacts. Shadows distort depending on the angle of the light source and the angle of the shadow object. That makes not much of a visual difference but it does when you measure and do the math.

All the debate on this forum about Eratosthenes's experiment and nobody has actually done it.


The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #70 on: December 16, 2017, 01:34:06 AM »
I care less
Yes, if you actually cared you wouldn't be spouting such childish crap.

Therefore I'm not going outside in 17 degree weather to prove something I don't even care about to some fucktard that is so clueless that he don't even realize circumference is the perimeter of a circle
Going outside will prove nothing.
You need to show how this experiment proves a round Earth.
No taking extra data to make it so you don't have unconstrained variables.

Just using 2 points, you need to show how it shows Earth is round, as similar experiments easily let you find the height of a building or some other object.

For example, this one here:

(from here: http://www.tiem.utk.edu/~gross/bioed/bealsmodules/triangle.html )
This experiment is equivalent.
Beneath the tree, the top is straight up, just like the sun.

Some distance away, the top is now at some angle, just like the sun.
It uses a right angle triangle and determines the tree's height.
But according to your reasoning, we should be able to use this to determine the circumference of Earth.
Lets see, a distance of 71 ft, an angle of 31.8 degrees, and thus an angle from vertical of 58.2 degrees
So each degree is 1.22 ft, so Earth's circumference must be 439 ft.

That doesn't sound right does it.
But it uses equivalent observations and equivalent math.
So what went wrong?
Was it because in order for the math to hold up the sun/top of the tree would need to be very far away?


What you are doing is like having an equation:
y+x=5, and saying this means x=5 because y=0.
But that isn't the case.
x can be 0 and y can be 5, x can be 3 and y can be 2.
You don't have enough information to solve it.

Just like those 2 measurements is not enough to determine both the shape of Earth and the height of the tree/sun.

You cannot prove the experiment doesn't prove the Earth is round Captain Coriolis.
The burden is on you to prove it does as you claimed it does.
All I need to do is point out your claim is unsubstantiated.


I say it does, prove it doesn't...
If I must.
His observation was that in Syrene, the sun was directly overhead.
Some 800 km away, the sun was at an angle of elevation of roughly 83 degrees.

By assuming Earth is flat, this forms a right angle triangle.
Thus we have the base (or adjacent side) which is 800 km, with an angle of 83 degrees and want to find the height.
Simple trig (using tan) gives us:
tan(83 deg)=h/800 km
h=800*tan(83 deg) km
=6515 km.
So the sun is 6515 km above a flat Earth.
But that is just one possibility.

In general, there are (at least) these 4 possibilities:

(Yes, I know it isn't too scale and the measurements are examples, but it shows the point).
You have a round Earth with a distant sun. But that would require assuming (or having another experiment) tell you the sun is far away.
But the sun can move closer.
As you bring the sun closer, Earth would expand. This gives another option, a large round Earth with a nearish sun.
Eventually, this expansion will necessitate an infinite radius. This gives another option, a flat Earth with a near sun.
But you can bring the sun even closer. This now results in Earth being inside out, giving the 4th option of an inside out Earth with a very close sun.

Notice how there are 2 variables here, the shape of Earth and the distance to the sun. (technically three as it is also the position of the sun).
You don't have Eratosthenes experiment does not have enough data to find a unique solution.

Going to admit you were wrong now, or will you continue with your stupidity. Sure, you can pretend it is trolling to try and hide how stupid you are, but everyone knows.

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #71 on: December 16, 2017, 01:37:08 AM »
It's this simple, this is how it was done. Watch the video.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #72 on: December 16, 2017, 02:17:09 AM »
It's this simple, this is how it was done. Watch the video.
No.
Stop deflecting.
Show quite clearly how it proves Earth is round.
Show what is wrong with what I have said.
If you can't do that, admit you were wrong or fuck off.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #73 on: December 16, 2017, 03:22:41 AM »
It's this simple, this is how it was done. Watch the video.
We've watched you video and it does not prove the earth is a Globe anymore than Eratosthenes' measurement did with only two points.
But Eratosthenes never set out to prove the earth was a Globe anymore than that video set out to prove the table was a circular.

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #74 on: December 16, 2017, 06:59:56 PM »
Guys, guys, chill out.  All you have to do is add a third city to the mix, then one side or the other will have their evidence.

Here, I've done it for you using values contributed by the artist formerly known as Intikam:


  • Notice how the lines intersect in three DIFFERENT places, even though all three cities are looking at ONE sun?
  • Notice how all three intersections are at DIFFERENT elevations, and even at DIFFERENT latitudes, even though all three cities are still looking at ONE sun?
  • Notice how the apparent location of the sun as estimated from Estonia and Baghdad is SOUTH of Buenos Aires?
All of this put together is pretty convincing.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #75 on: December 16, 2017, 07:26:05 PM »
Guys, guys, chill out.  All you have to do is add a third city to the mix, then one side or the other will have their evidence.
And that has never been the issue.
The issue was his claim that the experiment with only 2 points magically proves Earth is round.

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 20871
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #76 on: December 18, 2017, 12:06:08 AM »
What have we learned?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #77 on: December 18, 2017, 02:52:37 AM »
What have we learned?
To be ever vigilant in dealing with Martians?

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #78 on: December 18, 2017, 01:08:56 PM »
Eratosthenes's formula can be used to correctly calculate the circumference of a circle. Circumference is the perimeter, can the formula be used to correctly determine the perimeter of a square? Of a triangle? Of a polygon?

The experiment confirms the Earth is round because we can test it. That's where the video comes in. It shows that the methods is accurate within a few percent. The method only works with a circle, sphere, orb, ellipse, etc...

The fact this method only works with objects that are round proves the Earth is round. Otherwise Eratosthenes couldn't have accurately measured the circumference of the Earth. Square pegs don't fit in round holes... Something most 2yr old kids know...
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #79 on: December 18, 2017, 01:51:57 PM »
Eratosthenes's formula can be used to correctly calculate the circumference of a circle.
Again, this was never objected to.
This means that assuming Earth is a circle/sphere, you can use the measurements to determine its circumference.
It does not prove Earth is a sphere. It requires the assumption that it is one.

The experiment confirms the Earth is round because we can test it.
No it doesn't.
It shows that Earth is consistent with being round, not that it necessarily is round.
It relies upon assuming Earth is round to determine it's circumference.
The same measurements (and thus the same experiment) can be used to determine the height of the sun assumign a flat Erth.

That's where the video comes in. It shows that the methods is accurate within a few percent.
It shows that you can measure the circumference of a roudn object. It does not show that observations like this mean the object is round.

Again, the experiment I posted shows that the same method works to determine the height of an object.

The fact this method only works with objects that are round proves the Earth is round. Otherwise Eratosthenes couldn't have accurately measured the circumference of the Earth.
However, if Earth was flat the same measurements could have resulted with Eratosthenes calculating the circumference of Earth, even though it would not have one.

Again, this is an experiment using the same observational methodology:


You have the distance from what is equivalent to the sub-solar point and the angle to the object.
This is used to determine the height of the object.

These measurements are equivalent to Eratosthenes. Thus the same measurements can be used to determine the height of the sun above a flat Earth.

As such the experiment does not prove Earth is round.

*

Username

  • President Of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 17045
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #80 on: December 18, 2017, 06:46:12 PM »
It's not a logical fallacy - that is open. Its is an actual fallacy. But until we see evidence that differs - that is another story.
Quantum Ab Hoc

1 + 1 = 2
"The above proposition is occasionally useful." - Bertrand Russell

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #81 on: December 18, 2017, 07:25:00 PM »
It's not a logical fallacy - that is open. Its is an actual fallacy. But until we see evidence that differs - that is another story.
I'm curious, you claim not to believe in "a conspiracy", so are these possible "evidence"?

Here is a 1959 photo from United States Air Force:
55 years ago today (1959),
the 1st color photo of Earth from space
was taken from a Thor missile - 1 Dec 2014.


From: Ron Baalke, Space Explorer
at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
Asteroid 6524 Baalke.

From NASA 1972:
From ESA 2012:

MSG-3 captured its first image of the Earth

From Russia 2015:

Russian Satellite Photo
around midday in Dec 2015
From Japan, Dec 19, 2017:

Himawari 8 22:20 UTC 18 December 2017 "True Color Reproduction Image"

The earth sure looks like a Globe from all these different sources.


Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #82 on: December 18, 2017, 09:48:38 PM »
This means that assuming Earth is a circle/sphere, you can use the measurements to determine its circumference. It does not prove Earth is a sphere. It requires the assumption that it is one.

These measurements are equivalent to Eratosthenes. Thus the same measurements can be used to determine the height of the sun above a flat Earth.

The problem is his formula only works with circumference...  The same measurements can be used to show the fictional height of a fictional Sun over a fictional flat Earth... You don't see the problem there??? That same formula can also be used to calculate the height of Bigfoot, the length of the Loch Ness Monster and the weight of Santa Claus...

Assuming a shape and then proving it through math and science... That formula can still be tested by anybody willing to do the experiment...

What would you b doing if you were not responding to this post... Take the troll bait... You know you can't resist it... Hungry little bugger...
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #83 on: December 18, 2017, 11:21:36 PM »
The problem is his formula only works with circumference...  The same measurements can be used to show the fictional height of a fictional Sun over a fictional flat Earth... You don't see the problem there???
I do see it and I have been pointing it out repeatedly while you continually ignore it.
THAT IS THE PROBLEM!
The same measurements can be used to show the height of the sun over a FE.
It is only by assuming a spherical Earth and distant sun that you determine the circumference.
The experiment is unable to tell the difference between a near sun over a flat Earth and a distant sun away from a round Earth (and other possibilities as well).

As such, HIS EXPERIMENT DOES NOT PROVE EARTH IS ROUND!!!

That is the point I have been making repeatedly.


That same formula can also be used to calculate the height of Bigfoot, the length of the Loch Ness Monster
Only if you have the corresponding measurements.

Assuming a shape and then proving it through math and science
Except it wasn't proven by that experiment.

That formula can still be tested by anybody willing to do the experiment.
And the experiment itself still doesn't prove Earth is round.
Again, the same experiment (i.e. measurements, in isolation) can determine the height of the sun above a FE.

As such it does not prove Earth is round.

You either need something else to show Earth is round or your need more data making it a different experiment.

What would you b doing if you were not responding to this post
That varies a lot. I mainly come here to fill some free time and keep me occupied.

Take the troll bait
You can keep saying that, and the more you do the more it seems like you are using it as an excuse to hide your stupidity.

I don't care if you are a troll, I'm still going to point out your BS.

Unlike you, I care about the truth.

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #84 on: December 21, 2017, 10:01:53 AM »
I mainly come here to fill some free time and keep me occupied.
Unlike you, I care about the truth.

Who the fuck you trying to kid... Yourself??? Dude you're the biggest fucking troll on this forum and you're on here 24/7 you lying SOB!

Yeah you care sooo much about the truth that's why you're on the only forum where nobody gives a rats ass about the truth... Including you! If you were worried about the truth... You would start by admitting you're a fucking troll!!!
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #85 on: December 21, 2017, 12:52:16 PM »
Who the fuck you trying to kid... Yourself??? Dude you're the biggest fucking troll on this forum and you're on here 24/7 you lying SOB!

Yeah you care sooo much about the truth that's why you're on the only forum where nobody gives a rats ass about the truth... Including you! If you were worried about the truth... You would start by admitting you're a fucking troll!!!
And there you go with all the baseless insults.

But thanks for admitting you don't care about the truth.

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #86 on: December 21, 2017, 09:48:07 PM »
Who the fuck you trying to kid... Yourself??? Dude you're the biggest fucking troll on this forum and you're on here 24/7 you lying SOB!

Yeah you care sooo much about the truth that's why you're on the only forum where nobody gives a rats ass about the truth... Including you! If you were worried about the truth... You would start by admitting you're a fucking troll!!!
And there you go with all the baseless insults.

But thanks for admitting you don't care about the truth.

Yeah cause you're the purveyor of truth...

The insults are not baseless, you're a complete waste of a perfectly good keyboard. Your ISP should be fined by the FCC for even giving your dumbass access to the internet! If those pro-lifers would have known you would have turned out to be the waste of life you are, they would have never stopped your mom from entering that abortion clinic...

The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #87 on: December 22, 2017, 12:06:41 AM »
Who the fuck you trying to kid... Yourself??? Dude you're the biggest fucking troll on this forum and you're on here 24/7 you lying SOB!

Yeah you care sooo much about the truth that's why you're on the only forum where nobody gives a rats ass about the truth... Including you! If you were worried about the truth... You would start by admitting you're a fucking troll!!!
And there you go with all the baseless insults.

But thanks for admitting you don't care about the truth.

Yeah cause you're the purveyor of truth...

The insults are not baseless, you're a complete waste of a perfectly good keyboard. Your ISP should be fined by the FCC for even giving your dumbass access to the internet! If those pro-lifers would have known you would have turned out to be the waste of life you are, they would have never stopped your mom from entering that abortion clinic...
So I shall take this as an admission that you were wrong and that Eratosthenes didn't prove Earth was round, nor is his experiment, which just utilises 2 points, capable of doing such?

Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #88 on: December 22, 2017, 12:56:53 AM »
No you should take it as you are too stupid to understand the process of elimination. What shapes can Eratosthenes's formula be used to measure ACCURATELY??? A circle

Fictional make believe shit doesn't count. the FET version is bullshit because the angle of the shadow in relation to the angle of other shadow shows the angle of the Sun.

I grew up hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, rafting, etc... If you grew up behind a keyboard there are a lot of things you don't realize about nature and the world...

Have you even ever done the experiment? NOPE... Theoretically you base your argument on FET... Yet you refute ALL FET... So how the fuck does that work bozo???

FET is viable and proven science when it supports your statements but complete bullshit when it doesn't??? You fucking dumbass piece of shit... You too stu, stu, stupid to understand what the fuck I'm saying to you. You're full of bullshit and and I just pointed out how.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

By the way... Have a look at my sig! thanks for that gold nugget of "wisdom/failure" haha!!!
The Earth won't be 'round much longer...
No, it spins on its axis and orbits the sun. The 2 are fundamentally different... Because when an object spins, it does so about its axis.

*

JackBlack

  • 17252
Re: Why "it looks flat so it is flat" is a logical fallacy
« Reply #89 on: December 22, 2017, 01:22:30 AM »
No you should take it as you are too stupid to understand the process of elimination. What shapes can Eratosthenes's formula be used to measure ACCURATELY??? A circle
Forget his formula.
What shapes do his measurements work on?
Both, a spherical Earth (including an inside out one) and a flat Earth.
As such, IT DOES NOT PROVE EARTH IS ROUND!!!

Fictional make believe shit doesn't count. the FET version is bullshit because the angle of the shadow in relation to the angle of other shadow shows the angle of the Sun.
Except the formulas work fine. The FE version calculates the height of the sun, just like plenty of other examples which calculate the height of objects based upon trig.
The angle to the sun isn't the problem.


Theoretically you base your argument on FET... Yet you refute ALL FET... So how the fuck does that work bozo???
No, I base my argument on the fact that you do not have enough data to solve for all variables.


You're full of bullshit and and I just pointed out how.
And there you go lying yet again.
You have been completely unable to point out how I am wrong.
Instead you just continually make up shit and ignore the argument being made.


By the way... Have a look at my sig! thanks for that gold nugget of "wisdom/failure" haha!!!
You mean more of your pathetic dishonesty?