The Round Earther and the Biologist

  • 20 Replies
  • 2285 Views
*

midgard

  • 1300
The Round Earther and the Biologist
« on: January 03, 2007, 04:19:35 AM »
I'm sure most Round Earthers will scoff at this little "play" of mine and say that they don't do that at all. This is exactly what you are doing with the Conspiracy, you just don't realise it.

BIOLOGIST: There are upwards of 100 million undiscovered species on the earth.

ROUND EARTHER: Prove it!

BIOLOGIST: Well I can't prove it, but we speculate on the numbers based on how many species are turning up and how well explored the earth is.

ROUND EARTHER: But that's just speculation! Name just one undiscovered species! What's it look like? How many legs does it have? Draw me a picture of this "imaginary" animal!

BIOLOGIST: How am I supposed to draw something we haven't discovered yet?

ROUND EARTHER: Exactly! You can't because it doesn't exist!!! You have no PROOF!

BIOLOGIST: So what you're saying is that despite the evidence that there are 17,000 species discovered every year and the vast areas of the earth (especially the ocean) that haven't been extensively explored there are no undiscovered animals until they are discovered?

ROUND EARTHER: Exactly! If you can't prove it exists, it doesn't exist!

I'm sure that any Round Earther can see that the above "Round Earther" is being ridiculous. The biologist doesn't have proof of undiscovered species but he has reason to speculate that there still are undiscovered species.

The reason why Flat Earthers believe there must be a Conspiracy is because we believe that the Earth is flat. I'm sure most Round Earthers would agree that if the Earth is flat then there must be a Conspiracy - how else would you explain all the proofs that the Earth is round? Now here's where the problem arises: Round Earthers believe they can disprove the conspiracy because of lack of proof for the Conspiracy. They also believe that by pointing out how unlikely the Conspiracy is that it will count as proof against it. They seek to disprove the flatness of the Earth by disproving the Conspiracy. Unfortunately things don't work this way, if an animal hasn't been discovered it still exists.  Just because an animal seems unlikely doesn't mean that it can't exist - just look at the platypus. While you don't realise it, the honest truth is that it is impossible to disprove the Conspiracy. Even if the Conspiracy required 3.5 Billion people in the world to work it, it would still be possible (though extremely unlikely). Ask yourself this: could a flat earth exist as we know the earth today without a conspiracy? The answer is no.

The only way to disprove the conspiracy is to first rid a Flat Earther of his belief that the Earth is flat.

This is because Flat Earth beliefs in a conspiracy stem from belief that the earth is flat.[/color]
[/b]

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2007, 05:26:48 AM »
Ironically, the Round Earther is being Zetetic in this invented exchange, using the strictest Rowbothamian interpretation of the word.

I agree though that Zeteticism alone is not enough to justify the Flat Earth - some Theoretic science must be used (much of our knowledge of the Conspiracy is derived in a Theoretic, not Zetetic manner - not explicitly examining the Conspiracy, but deriving its existence through logical steps which must be true).
"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

Re: The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #2 on: January 03, 2007, 05:29:22 AM »
Quote from: "midgard"
ROUND EARTHER: Exactly! If you can't prove it exists, it doesn't exist!


You're funny.
quot;Earth is flat because there is a conspiracy, and there is a conspiracy because the Earth is flat" - Makes sense, duh.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=2955.0

*

midgard

  • 1300
Re: The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #3 on: January 03, 2007, 08:50:28 AM »
Quote from: "Xargo"
Quote from: "midgard"
ROUND EARTHER: Exactly! If you can't prove it exists, it doesn't exist!


You're funny.


Thankyou.

I take it that because you're not making an argument against this thread that you agree trying to disprove the Conspiracy is futile?

?

Erasmus

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4242
The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #4 on: January 03, 2007, 08:57:37 AM »
Hm, I would disagree in a small way: if it can be logically proven that there is no conspiracy, that would disprove FEism.  It is not clear, however, how one might go about formulating such a proof.
Why did the chicken cross the Möbius strip?

Re: The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #5 on: January 03, 2007, 09:14:12 AM »
Quote from: "midgard"
I'm sure most Round Earthers will scoff at this little "play" of mine and say that they don't do that at all. This is exactly what you are doing with the Conspiracy, you just don't realize it.

...fictional conversation...

This is because Flat Earth beliefs in a conspiracy stem from belief that the earth is flat.[/color][/b]


No, it is not "Exactly" what we are doing, and of course we will scoff, because you are misrepresenting the nature of the debate.

What you are arguing is almost the exact opposite of the RE's complaint with the conspiracy.

Since there is a history of undiscovered species being discovered, the trend indicates that there are more to be discovered.  

Since the supposed conspiracy would be known to humans,
And up till now no creditable conspirators have been uncovered, despite the fact that the opportunities for uncovering it would expand geometrically over time, the trend indicates that it is increasingly unlikely that there is a conspiracy.

Since the Flat Earth theory seemingly requires that there be a conspiracy, it is likewise increasingly unlikely that it is true.

The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #6 on: January 03, 2007, 10:08:08 AM »
Well, your example is not accurate since neither one position or the other have any proofs of what they say.

REers have over 400 years of proofs and nearly 40 years of space exploration, while FEers have one book showing one "major" argument which is based on the work of only one man (too little to be considered as a transparent scientific work), an amateur experimenting with nearly no calculations (also, in no way a scientific demonstration), and I doubt he had went to University in physics or any sciences that could have helped him.

So, REers have MANY more arguments than your sucky conversation show. That's not the type of conversation. That's the type of conversation you want to remember in order to make your answers (to the question about the shape of the Earth) more accurate or I don't know why.

The typical conversation should have looked like this :

FEer : The Earth is flat, look at Rowbotham's book and the FE compendium.
REer : The Earth is round since there are over 400 years of proofs and 40 years of space exploration.
FEer : There's a conspiracy (which I can't prove, nor I can't prove why I know about it even if it's a, indeed, secret conspiracy) and we have PROOFS.
REer : Your book is not scientifically credible (because of the reasons I've already noticed).
FEer : No answer. Changes thread or answer anything but the real question.

In all : sorry, try again.
arth is spheric.

*

midgard

  • 1300
Re: The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #7 on: January 03, 2007, 10:08:19 AM »
Quote from: "Curious"
Since there is a history of undiscovered species being discovered, the trend indicates that there are more to be discovered.


It is a reasonable speculation because there is a history of undiscovered species being discovered and because there are vast areas across the globe that are relatively, if not completely, untouched by humans. These are the reasons biologists speculate that there are undiscovered species on earth.

The reason we speculate about a Conspiracy is because we know the earth is flat. You don't believe the earth is flat so you don't think the conspiracy is a reasonable speculation. If we could open your eyes and you could see the truth you'd realise that the Conspiracy is a reasonable speculation.

Quote from: "Curious"
Since the supposed conspiracy would be known to humans, And up till now no creditable conspirators have been uncovered, despite the fact that the opportunities for uncovering it would expand geometrically over time, the trend indicates that it is increasingly unlikely that there is a conspiracy.


Note you said unlikely.

What you're actually pointing out is the trend that shows the Conspiracy getting more and more adept at being secretive and covering things up.

Quote from: "Curious"
Since the Flat Earth theory seemingly requires that there be a conspiracy, it is likewise increasingly unlikely that it is true.


I hope you noted again that you said unlikely.

The big point is: you can't prove the Conspiracy doesn't exist.  You can show how unlikely it is and how improbable, but you can't actually prove that it doesn't exist. You might be able to logically demonstrate that it would require 90% of the earth's population and the majority of the resources on the earth but even if you demonstrate that it wouldn't prove the conspiracy doesn't exist - it would only demonstrate how unlikely it is.

The only way to get rid of the conspiracy is to get rid of the idea of a flat earth. So long as the earth is flat then a Conspiracy must exist.

*

midgard

  • 1300
The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2007, 10:10:19 AM »
Quote from: "yop69g"
So, REers have MANY more arguments than your sucky conversation show. That's not the type of conversation. That's the type of conversation you want to remember in order to make your answers (to the question about the shape of the Earth) more accurate or I don't know why.


I wasn't demonstrating a typical conversation nor talking about FET vs. RET as a whole. This post is about the Conspiracy.

I was merely demonstrating the futitlity of trying to argue against the conspiracy. It is impossible to disprove.

The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #9 on: January 03, 2007, 10:11:57 AM »
Quote from: "midgard"
Quote from: "yop69g"
So, REers have MANY more arguments than your sucky conversation show. That's not the type of conversation. That's the type of conversation you want to remember in order to make your answers (to the question about the shape of the Earth) more accurate or I don't know why.


I wasn't demonstrating a typical conversation nor talking about FET vs. RET as a whole.

I was merely demonstrating the futitlity of trying to argue against the conspiracy. It is impossible to disprove.

The FET is bigger than the conspiracy. If there's no FE, there's no FET.
arth is spheric.

*

midgard

  • 1300
The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #10 on: January 03, 2007, 10:13:57 AM »
Quote from: "yop69g"
The FET is bigger than the conspiracy. If there's no FE, there's no FET.


Here you go yop, this is my basic lesson for the day:

-Different threads cover different aspects of the theory.

This is not about the whole FET vs. RET, this is about the Conspiracy. Do you understand yet?

The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #11 on: January 03, 2007, 10:23:18 AM »
Quote from: "midgard"
Quote from: "yop69g"
The FET is bigger than the conspiracy. If there's no FE, there's no FET.


Here you go yop, this is my basic lesson for the day:

-Different threads cover different aspects of the theory.

This is not about the whole FET vs. RET, this is about the Conspiracy. Do you understand yet?

Well, there is very little chances that ALL governments have always said the same thing since they know the Earth is round (about 1500s?). But it could be possible, even if it's veeeeery unprobable. People would have noticed that their government has changed his idea about the shape of the Earth very quickly with no apparent reasons.

I can't say that the conspiracy doesn't exist, but I can say that it's veeery unlikely to exist.

So, I go at a bigger point that includes the conspiracy thing.

No FE = no FET = no conspiracy.

And based on a lot of proofs and logic errors in the FE, I can say that it's not true since nobody can prove without any doubt that it's true, and since the opposite side have hundreds of photos, hundreds of facts all pointing to a RE, etc.

Do you get my point or you'll keep saying that I'm not in the right thread (even if I'm talking about the conspiracy and pointing to a larger argument... but it's how it works on FES, I guess ??)
arth is spheric.

?

Erasmus

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4242
The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #12 on: January 03, 2007, 10:27:34 AM »
Quote from: "yop69g"
And based on a lot of proofs and logic errors in the FE, I can say that it's not true since nobody can prove without any doubt that it's true,


This reminds me of a certain "parody argument" held between a biologists and an REer...

Quote
Do you get my point or you'll keep saying that I'm not in the right thread (even if I'm talking about the conspiracy and pointing to a larger argument... but it's how it works on FES, I guess ??)


For the sake of keeping the discussion civil and clear, perhaps we could just assume that in all threads, some REer has already contributed the gem, "But the Earth isn't flat, so [FE feature under discussion here] can't be true either."?  That way nobody has to actually say it, and we can stop going off on these idiotic tangents.
Why did the chicken cross the Möbius strip?

*

midgard

  • 1300
The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #13 on: January 03, 2007, 10:35:04 AM »
I quite agree with you yop. If you disprove the Flat Earth, you take out the conspiracy.

The whole point I'm making is one against people starting threads trying to disprove FET by disproving the conspiracy. As you said no matter how unlikely the conspiracy becomes you still can't disprove it.

All in all I think it's high time people stopped discussing the conspiracy and started discussing the more important issue of whether the earth is flat or not. Once you realise it is you will logically realise that there is a conspiracy too.

The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #14 on: January 03, 2007, 11:21:21 AM »
You can extrapolate data from the fact that 17,000+ species are discoverec every year. There's a premise/basis there. Also, there is no thoery that proves otherwise. Furthermore it is unscientific to say "something does not exist" unless the exact opposite has been proven 100% true.

What's the premise for a flat earth? The premise for a round earth is that all physics equations developed from before Isaac Newton's time to well after Einstein's time work with a round earth. Therefore the round earth theory must work. There's also all this empirical evidence of a round earth.
It's quite remarkable really that both Israel and Palestine have no qualms about slaughtering the crap out of each other - but they are perfectly willing to work together jovially and hide a secret that wouldn't make much difference to the world. -rdethgy

Re: The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #15 on: January 03, 2007, 11:24:46 AM »
Quote from: "midgard"

1..The reason we speculate about a Conspiracy is because we know the earth is flat.
2..Note you said unlikely
3..What you're actually pointing out is the trend that shows the Conspiracy getting more and more adept at being secretive and covering things up......
4...hope you noted again that you said unlikely
5...you can't prove the Conspiracy doesn't exist...You can show how unlikely it is and how improbable, but you can't actually prove that it doesn't exist. ...it would only demonstrate how unlikely it is...
6...only way to get rid of the conspiracy is to get rid of the idea of a flat earth. So long as the earth is flat then a Conspiracy must exist.


Ok.  

1...You "know" something based on indirect evidence...That is not knowledge, that is belief.  I'm sure you know the story of the three blind men and the elephant.  

2...I said "Unlikely" because I was using a logical argument, it is logically impossible to disprove the existence of something, but just as I can say it is unlikely that all the molecules at on point of your chair will have the energy to spontaneously combust, even though it is theoretically possible, a high enough improbability is enough to discount a theory (unless you have an infinite improbability drive active).

3...That is not "Shown", that is a possible conclusion, but not the only, nor the most likely conclusion.  

4 + 5..As in #2

6...Science is based on theory and observation.  When enough evidence has been gathered to make a theory unlikely it is discounted, when enough evidence is gathered to verify a theory it becomes a law.  You can not prove that there is not an object who's density is greater than the surrounding air that will not will fall that when dropped, however based on observation and theory it can be stated there is no such object.

But to turn the tables, you can not prove that there is a conspiracy without either providing direct evidence, or at least proving the world flat.

There have been almost no threads that even try to prove a flat earth, the closest try to prove that some aspect needed for the flat earth to work has some theoretical possibility, with little or no value given to the probability.

The FE's tend explain away observation, the RE's (Ok at least some of us..Some RE'rs are just obnoxious) try to present observations that are consistent with a global earth.  

What observations of a flat earth have been made that are not consistent with a global earth of very large dimensions?

The argument is made that you have nothing to prove, because you know it to be flat.  How do you "Know"?  What supports you knowledge.

Re: The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #16 on: January 03, 2007, 11:27:59 AM »
Quote from: "Curious"
What observations of a flat earth have been made that are not consistent with a global earth of very large dimensions?

The argument is made that you have nothing to prove, because you know it to be flat.  How do you "Know"?  What supports you knowledge.


QFT
It's quite remarkable really that both Israel and Palestine have no qualms about slaughtering the crap out of each other - but they are perfectly willing to work together jovially and hide a secret that wouldn't make much difference to the world. -rdethgy

*

Sanirius

  • 289
  • ~rawr~
The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #17 on: January 03, 2007, 02:17:34 PM »
who says round earthers would say there arent so many species? :P

*

midgard

  • 1300
The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #18 on: January 04, 2007, 03:20:35 AM »
Quote from: "Big N"
You can extrapolate data from the fact that 17,000+ species are discoverec every year. There's a premise/basis there.


That's exactly what I'm getting at. Flat Earthers believe the Earth is flat and that is the premise for their belief in a Conspiracy. To get rid of the Conspiracy get rid of the Flat Earth.

Quote from: "Big N"
What's the premise for a flat earth? The premise for a round earth is that all physics equations developed from before Isaac Newton's time to well after Einstein's time work with a round earth. Therefore the round earth theory must work. There's also all this empirical evidence of a round earth.


These are exactly the arguments that should be addressed... but not on this thread.

This thread is about the futility of trying to prove that the earth is round by way of disproving the conspiracy.

I did not start this thread as evidence of a conspiracy. I'm merely pointing out that the focus of discussions should not be on the conspiracy but on whether the earth is round or flat - it is the outcome of this question that will answer the conspiracy.

Really, the questions this thread is trying to cover is:
  • Is it possible to disprove the conspiracy to somebody who believes the earth is flat?
  • Is there any benefit to the Round Earthers trying to do so when disproving Flat Earth theory would then also remove the conspiracy?
It is not trying to cover:
  • Whether or not there is a conspiracy.
  • Whether or not the earth is flat.
The point of this thread is basically trying to establish whether there is any benefit to Round Earthers starting threads that attempt to disprove the Conspiracy.

The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #19 on: January 04, 2007, 07:50:16 PM »
Quote from: "midgard"
Quote from: "Big N"
You can extrapolate data from the fact that 17,000+ species are discoverec every year. There's a premise/basis there.


That's exactly what I'm getting at. Flat Earthers believe the Earth is flat and that is the premise for their belief in a Conspiracy. To get rid of the Conspiracy get rid of the Flat Earth.

Quote from: "Big N"
What's the premise for a flat earth? The premise for a round earth is that all physics equations developed from before Isaac Newton's time to well after Einstein's time work with a round earth. Therefore the round earth theory must work. There's also all this empirical evidence of a round earth.


These are exactly the arguments that should be addressed... but not on this thread.

This thread is about the futility of trying to prove that the earth is round by way of disproving the conspiracy.

I did not start this thread as evidence of a conspiracy. I'm merely pointing out that the focus of discussions should not be on the conspiracy but on whether the earth is round or flat - it is the outcome of this question that will answer the conspiracy.

Really, the questions this thread is trying to cover is:
  • Is it possible to disprove the conspiracy to somebody who believes the earth is flat?
  • Is there any benefit to the Round Earthers trying to do so when disproving Flat Earth theory would then also remove the conspiracy?
It is not trying to cover:
  • Whether or not there is a conspiracy.
  • Whether or not the earth is flat.
The point of this thread is basically trying to establish whether there is any benefit to Round Earthers starting threads that attempt to disprove the Conspiracy.


But it comes full circle.  
Can the earth be flat without the conspiracy?  Not likely.
Can a global conspiracy of such magnitude last for centuries, in light of the constantly expanding technologies and our increased ability for the common man to travel? Nearly impossible.

The net result is that it is extremely unlikely for the world to be flat, and much more possible and plausible for the world to be a globe.

Therefore, to eschew the practical answer to embrace the implausible is simply illogical.

*

midgard

  • 1300
The Round Earther and the Biologist
« Reply #20 on: January 05, 2007, 04:47:44 AM »
Quote from: "Curious"
But it comes full circle.  
Can the earth be flat without the conspiracy?  Not likely.
Can a global conspiracy of such magnitude last for centuries, in light of the constantly expanding technologies and our increased ability for the common man to travel? Nearly impossible.

The net result is that it is extremely unlikely for the world to be flat, and much more possible and plausible for the world to be a globe.

Therefore, to eschew the practical answer to embrace the implausible is simply illogical.


Nearly impossible. This is what I'm getting at: can you prove the conspiracy doesn't exist?

I know you can demonstrate how extremely unlikely it is but how can you actually prove it doesn't exist?

I don't believe in God but I'm not about to claim that I can prove God doesn't exist (though some may make the claim).

Do you think there is any benefit in Round Earther's pointing out how improbable the Conspiracy is? You say that it's not likely that the Flat Earth could exist - I would almost go as far as to say that it is impossible.

I know that I'm repeating myself but hopefully it will sink in:

You can demonstrate how improbable a Conspiracy is all you like but you can't disprove it. Because it is essential to Flat Earth beliefs a Flat Earther will not throw away the Conspiracy. Therefore, there is no point in discussing the Conspiracy and demonstrating the improbable nature of it as it will accomplish nothing.