Flat Earth - Make me a believer

  • 23 Replies
  • 2729 Views
Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« on: August 15, 2018, 06:22:38 AM »
Good morning to you all. I am new to the forum.

I have been raised with science in mind always. I have been taught the laws of Physics and Chemistry. I have learned the laws of science. That a theory is just that until proven. I heard that there was a new theory, a flat earth theory. I am open minded, and I would love to here alternative theories.

I have read through the ideas, and concepts behind it. I have a few issues with the theory, and I would like them addressed. If they are addressed, then you have a believer. If they are not, then I will go on my merry way!

Horizon
I have travelled from place to place, and in my travels I have visited several mountains. I have looked across vast areas and I have seen the horizon, with the relief of other mountains in view as I travelled up and down. I understand that you do not appreciate photo evidence, since it can easily be doctored, so I will relay this information only from my personal experience.

As I travelled higher up the mountain, the horizon of the lake slowly began to creep down the side of the mountain. The was a small fishing dock at the base of the mountain, next to the lake, which I could see upon reaching the peak. I tracked the base of the mountain using this, as well as some other recognisable features towards the bottom of the mountain as I moved back down the mountain, and slowly but surely, the lake seemed to move up and above these reference points. The scientific theory most widely accepted for this is that the earth is curved, and as I lower my altitude, the curvature of the earth means that the water is between me and the base of the mountain. What is your explanation for this?

The ISS

I have a telescope. I bought it from a local store, and it has no affiliation to a government agency, or to any space agency (since I know that there are pieces of equipment that do). I have looked at the International space station, which can be clearly viewed under only 100x magnification, travelling across the horizon. Once again, I will not refer to any scientific texts or photographic/video evidence for this. I can clearly see the outline of the space station, even able to make out the solar cells. If I time it right, I can observe the point where it appears on the horizon, and disappears beyond it.

There is nothing electronic in this telescope, it is entirely manual. The light that comes from the ISS is definitely entering my eye. The path that it follows suggests, through plain sight, that it is orbiting a spherical object. What is your theory?

Lasers (On earth)

I travelled to a large lake area. I was doing a science experiment, which was to prove the curvature of the earth, using a laser (The laser that we had was a very high powered Laser, which we tested in an aircraft hanger to test it's accuracy. It was accurate to within a millimetre, over 20 metres.).

We set up a the laser, ensuring that it was parallel to the earth using a tripod. We tested it over the same 15 metre sample, and it was again accurate to within a millimetre. The laser pointed out across a lake. We took a helicopter over to the other side of the Lake. We then travelled up the mountain on the other side, to measure where the laser pointer finished up. It was at a height of 60 ft. The common scientific theory for this is that when pointing an object parallel to the face of a sphere, the Laser will get further and further away from the surface of the sphere. What is your explanation?

Many Thanks,
I look forward to your reply.
David B


Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2018, 07:31:37 AM »
Good morning to you all. I am new to the forum.

I have been raised with science in mind always. I have been taught the laws of Physics and Chemistry. I have learned the laws of science. That a theory is just that until proven. I heard that there was a new theory, a flat earth theory. I am open minded, and I would love to here alternative theories.

I have read through the ideas, and concepts behind it. I have a few issues with the theory, and I would like them addressed. If they are addressed, then you have a believer. If they are not, then I will go on my merry way!

Horizon
I have travelled from place to place, and in my travels I have visited several mountains. I have looked across vast areas and I have seen the horizon, with the relief of other mountains in view as I travelled up and down. I understand that you do not appreciate photo evidence, since it can easily be doctored, so I will relay this information only from my personal experience.

As I travelled higher up the mountain, the horizon of the lake slowly began to creep down the side of the mountain. The was a small fishing dock at the base of the mountain, next to the lake, which I could see upon reaching the peak. I tracked the base of the mountain using this, as well as some other recognisable features towards the bottom of the mountain as I moved back down the mountain, and slowly but surely, the lake seemed to move up and above these reference points. The scientific theory most widely accepted for this is that the earth is curved, and as I lower my altitude, the curvature of the earth means that the water is between me and the base of the mountain. What is your explanation for this?

The ISS

I have a telescope. I bought it from a local store, and it has no affiliation to a government agency, or to any space agency (since I know that there are pieces of equipment that do). I have looked at the International space station, which can be clearly viewed under only 100x magnification, travelling across the horizon. Once again, I will not refer to any scientific texts or photographic/video evidence for this. I can clearly see the outline of the space station, even able to make out the solar cells. If I time it right, I can observe the point where it appears on the horizon, and disappears beyond it.

There is nothing electronic in this telescope, it is entirely manual. The light that comes from the ISS is definitely entering my eye. The path that it follows suggests, through plain sight, that it is orbiting a spherical object. What is your theory?

Lasers (On earth)

I travelled to a large lake area. I was doing a science experiment, which was to prove the curvature of the earth, using a laser (The laser that we had was a very high powered Laser, which we tested in an aircraft hanger to test it's accuracy. It was accurate to within a millimetre, over 20 metres.).

We set up a the laser, ensuring that it was parallel to the earth using a tripod. We tested it over the same 15 metre sample, and it was again accurate to within a millimetre. The laser pointed out across a lake. We took a helicopter over to the other side of the Lake. We then travelled up the mountain on the other side, to measure where the laser pointer finished up. It was at a height of 60 ft. The common scientific theory for this is that when pointing an object parallel to the face of a sphere, the Laser will get further and further away from the surface of the sphere. What is your explanation?

Many Thanks,
I look forward to your reply.
David B

Horizon - It does appear that you assume light travels in straight lines through air. Altitude, water vapor content, temperature gradients can change that. How is that accounted for?

ISS - You can track that object using a 100x telescope manually?  Pretty good. You can clearly see an object. But "The path that it follows suggests, through plain sight, that it is orbiting a spherical object." It may suggest it to you, I'll bet others here wouldn't be so suggestible. Funny, through plain sight there are a couple more conclusions you could reach, say, regarding the shape of the Earth.

Lasers - Again, light is assumed to travel in a straight line, especially across a lake, although that may not be an effect here. I would like to ask a couple detailed questions about the setup, though. What was the approximate diameter of the laser at 20 meters in your hanger experiment? How did you measure its location? What color? What was the approximate diameter on the other side of the lake (on the mountain)?

Welcome, and have fun!

Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2018, 07:52:25 AM »
Just curious about why you would be doing an experiment to prove the curvature of the earth whilst having no knowledge of the flat earth theory. Is there any documentation of said experiment you could share with us?

With high powered lasers and helicopters, no less.

This anecdote sounds suspect to me.

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21049
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #3 on: August 15, 2018, 09:06:05 AM »

I have been raised with science in mind always. I have been taught the laws of Physics and Chemistry. I have learned the laws of science. That a theory is just that until proven.

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.



Horizon

I have travelled from place to place, and in my travels I have visited several mountains. I have looked across vast areas and I have seen the horizon, with the relief of other mountains in view as I travelled up and down.

Where was this?



The ISS

I have a telescope. I bought it from a local store, and it has no affiliation to a government agency, or to any space agency (since I know that there are pieces of equipment that do). I have looked at the International space station, which can be clearly viewed under only 100x magnification, travelling across the horizon. . . .
There is nothing electronic in this telescope, it is entirely manual.

You did not manually track the ISS with a telescope at 100x magnification.



Lasers (On earth)

I travelled to a large lake area. I was doing a science experiment, which was to prove the curvature of the earth, using a laser (The laser that we had was a very high powered Laser, which we tested in an aircraft hanger to test it's accuracy. It was accurate to within a millimetre, over 20 metres.).

The dot was within 1mm of the dot?







Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #4 on: August 15, 2018, 01:43:15 PM »
I understand that you do not appreciate photo evidence, since it can easily be doctored, so I will relay this information only from my personal experience.

Why should your unsupported account of your personal experience be more believable than photographic evidence? Your own account is easier to 'doctor' than photos - you can just plain lie.

*

JackBlack

  • 19032
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #5 on: August 15, 2018, 02:59:23 PM »
That a theory is just that until proven. I heard that there was a new theory, a flat earth theory.
Then you misunderstand.
In science, the equivalent to a lay-person theory would be a hypothesis.
A hypothesis remains as a hypothesis until it is disproven, or significant experimentation has been done which shows it holds.
If the former, it is discarded and becomes a disproven hypothesis. If the latter, it becomes a theory. That is the closest to proof science comes, as proof requires deductive reasoning, rather than the inductive reasoning science relies upon.

FE is not a theory, it is a disproven hypothesis. While the modern version is new, the same disproofs still apply.

I also find some of the rest of your story to be quite suspect, and the reasoning seriously flawed.
For the ISS with a manual telescope the best you would likely be able to do is set it up and watch it fly past.
From that you can't tell what kind of path it is following.

How did you determine that the laser was only off by 1 mm?
How large was the laser beam?
If it started out at 1 mm, and was green (wavelength 532 nm), then over the course of 20 m it would diverge to be roughly 10 mm.
I would also love to know why you did the laser experiment in the first place.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #6 on: August 15, 2018, 07:32:05 PM »
Good morning to you all. I am new to the forum.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Many Thanks,
I look forward to your reply.
David B
Good morning to you too. But why should anyone be interested in making you a believer?
You study up the evidence for and against and make up your own mind. No-one can make anyone a believer in anything.

Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #7 on: August 16, 2018, 06:16:38 AM »
I understand that you do not appreciate photo evidence, since it can easily be doctored, so I will relay this information only from my personal experience.

Why should your unsupported account of your personal experience be more believable than photographic evidence? Your own account is easier to 'doctor' than photos - you can just plain lie.

Reading the Forum information page - asks the people of this forum to rely on their senses as opposed to using photographic evidence which could be doctored.

Learn to conform, Man C:

Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #8 on: August 16, 2018, 06:23:49 AM »
Just curious about why you would be doing an experiment to prove the curvature of the earth whilst having no knowledge of the flat earth theory. Is there any documentation of said experiment you could share with us?

The experiment was actually reproducing an Ancient Greek experiment (by Eratosthenes) which used the shadows of two towers several kms apart (two points in egypt) to estimate the circumference of the earth, distance to the sun etc. This was a more modern take on it, and was nothing to do with Flat earth at the time. This was just one element of several experiments we did in a lead up to our final conclusions regarding the Earth and it's relation to the Solar system.

Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #9 on: August 16, 2018, 06:43:46 AM »

I have been raised with science in mind always. I have been taught the laws of Physics and Chemistry. I have learned the laws of science. That a theory is just that until proven.

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.


In my opinion:
A theory is the most likely reasoning behind something based on the evidence available. An educated guess would probably be more appropriate - but anyone can have a theory, and that theory's supporting evidence could be good or bad. Thus, some theories are better than others, some are disproven, some are proven, some remain theories. Once proven, they become a Law. So, with the absence of a Flat Earth Law, and rules inside the theory that govern the refuting of evidence without proper foundation (eg. photographic evidence), you can see why some people might think that Flat earth theory is flimsy as a premise, and would need convincing. 




Horizon

I have travelled from place to place, and in my travels I have visited several mountains. I have looked across vast areas and I have seen the horizon, with the relief of other mountains in view as I travelled up and down.

Where was this?

It was in the Lake district.


The ISS

I have a telescope. I bought it from a local store, and it has no affiliation to a government agency, or to any space agency (since I know that there are pieces of equipment that do). I have looked at the International space station, which can be clearly viewed under only 100x magnification, travelling across the horizon. . . .
There is nothing electronic in this telescope, it is entirely manual.

You did not manually track the ISS with a telescope at 100x magnification.

I did, and I urge you to try it yourself. The link to find it's location is here :https://spotthestation.nasa.gov/signup.cfm You only need decent binoculars to track it, the magnification was used to identify it.






Lasers (On earth)

I travelled to a large lake area. I was doing a science experiment, which was to prove the curvature of the earth, using a laser (The laser that we had was a very high powered Laser, which we tested in an aircraft hanger to test it's accuracy. It was accurate to within a millimetre, over 20 metres.).

The dot was within 1mm of the dot?

Not quite - it was a calibration cycle, which had some sort of target at one end, and some sort of meter (altimeter maybe?) on each side. I won't pretend to know how the calibration worked. So the height of the start point of the laser vs the height of the lasers end point was accurate.



Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #10 on: August 16, 2018, 08:48:21 AM »
I understand that you do not appreciate photo evidence, since it can easily be doctored, so I will relay this information only from my personal experience.

Why should your unsupported account of your personal experience be more believable than photographic evidence? Your own account is easier to 'doctor' than photos - you can just plain lie.

Reading the Forum information page - asks the people of this forum to rely on their senses as opposed to using photographic evidence which could be doctored.

Yes, their senses, not someone else's. Your account of your own sensory experience carries even less weight than photos would have done.

Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #11 on: August 16, 2018, 12:33:10 PM »

Lasers (On earth)

I travelled to a large lake area. I was doing a science experiment, which was to prove the curvature of the earth, using a laser (The laser that we had was a very high powered Laser, which we tested in an aircraft hanger to test it's accuracy. It was accurate to within a millimetre, over 20 metres.).

We set up a the laser, ensuring that it was parallel to the earth using a tripod. We tested it over the same 15 metre sample, and it was again accurate to within a millimetre. The laser pointed out across a lake. We took a helicopter over to the other side of the Lake. We then travelled up the mountain on the other side, to measure where the laser pointer finished up. It was at a height of 60 ft. The common scientific theory for this is that when pointing an object parallel to the face of a sphere, the Laser will get further and further away from the surface of the sphere. What is your explanation?



Not quite - it was a calibration cycle, which had some sort of target at one end, and some sort of meter (altimeter maybe?) on each side. I won't pretend to know how the calibration worked.



What is your explanation?


If you can't explain how your experiment worked, how is anyone else supposed to explain the results?

*

JackBlack

  • 19032
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #12 on: August 16, 2018, 03:41:18 PM »
Thus, some theories are better than others, some are disproven, some are proven, some remain theories. Once proven, they become a Law.
Then again, you don't understand.
Laws are mathematical relations which are part of a theory.
Theories don't become laws, they contains laws.

Not quite - it was a calibration cycle, which had some sort of target at one end, and some sort of meter (altimeter maybe?) on each side. I won't pretend to know how the calibration worked. So the height of the start point of the laser vs the height of the lasers end point was accurate.
So you have no idea what it was actually doing and thus claiming it was accurate to within 1 mm is dishonest.

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21049
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #13 on: August 16, 2018, 03:49:06 PM »
The kid was obviously full of crap from the start.

Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #14 on: August 16, 2018, 07:43:20 PM »
I will say only one thing . The pole star un moveable. Seen "under" eqator too. And if you will check it on cam all night you will see that all star in the sky turns around this star. Conclusion:
1).the north pole seen everywhere . The evidence of FLAT EARTH.
2).all stars turns around it all night . The evidence of unmoveable earth.
Thats all folks . Globeheads game over😆😉

*

JackBlack

  • 19032
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #15 on: August 16, 2018, 07:50:03 PM »
I will say only one thing . The pole star un moveable. Seen "under" eqator too. And if you will check it on cam all night you will see that all star in the sky turns around this star. Conclusion:
1).the north pole seen everywhere . The evidence of FLAT EARTH.
2).all stars turns around it all night . The evidence of unmoveable earth.
Thats all folks . Globeheads game over😆😉
That was several things, all of which are factually incorrect and unrelated to the topic.
Polaris is not seen significantly south of the equator.
The only time I have seen it is when I have went to the northern hemisphere. That is evidence against the FE.
The apparent motion of the stars is not evidence for or against motion of Earth as it is just relative motion.
However, in the south, the stars appear to circle a point due south, which is evidence against a FE.
So yes, game over, you lose.

Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #16 on: August 17, 2018, 07:02:13 AM »
Well, I have had about enough of this.

Being a FE appears to be:

"I attempt to damage your argument as quickly as possible, without providing an alternative

I make up rules, to prevent evidence presentation on an unfounded basis, then when people abide by them, discount their own experience as useless/without value

I preach of conspiracies. Massive, and impossible to maintain conspiracies, without any evidence

I discount well founded scientific theories, countering them with unfounded arguments based on single experience

I treat people like idiots, because they have an opinion/argument that I consider wrong, although by my own admission my theory is also unproven and potentially wrong"


When I joined this forum, I did so in a way that I thought was conforming to the rules, and asking for answers. In this whole thread, not a single answer to any of the original questions has been given. Why are you pulling apart a scenario, that you have no true idea if it is true or not? I can't provide images, they would have been doctored. I can't show a diagram or document of findings, they could have been faked. So, without the opportunity to present evidence, and only hearsay to go on, I could say that "I am Tony the Tiger and I live on Mars with twenty of the Green Aliens from Toy Story", or that "I am a male human and I live in a house on a Spherical earth" and you would analyse it, and attempt to disprove it in exactly the same way.






 




Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #17 on: August 17, 2018, 08:11:12 AM »
Well, I have had about enough of this.

Two days, five posts.

In this whole thread, not a single answer to any of the original questions has been given.


Horizon - It does appear that you assume light travels in straight lines through air. Altitude, water vapor content, temperature gradients can change that. How is that accounted for?

ISS - You can track that object using a 100x telescope manually?  Pretty good. You can clearly see an object. But "The path that it follows suggests, through plain sight, that it is orbiting a spherical object." It may suggest it to you, I'll bet others here wouldn't be so suggestible. Funny, through plain sight there are a couple more conclusions you could reach, say, regarding the shape of the Earth.

Lasers - Again, light is assumed to travel in a straight line, especially across a lake, although that may not be an effect here. I would like to ask a couple detailed questions about the setup, though. What was the approximate diameter of the laser at 20 meters in your hanger experiment? How did you measure its location? What color? What was the approximate diameter on the other side of the lake (on the mountain)?

Welcome, and have fun!

I answered all three, though perhaps not to your satisfaction. I asked a couple questions, too, as your description didn't have any significant detail at all.

To the first question "What is your explanation for this?" - you're basing a determination on an assumption that light travels in a straight line at all times. It doesn't. I asked how you took this into account.

To the second question "What is your theory?" your right, the answer is not as direct. I'll state it here clearly. "It *looks* like it's orbiting a spherical object" is as valid as "It *looks* like its flying above a flat plane." You haven't given any other justification, and from your description is nothing more than "countering them with unfounded arguments based on single experience."

To the third question "What is your explanation?" I did already address this in another post but let me restate it here in simple terms. You can't describe how you leveled a laser. ("I won't pretend to know how the calibration worked.") You do not know your laser was level. The laser on your mountain was higher than expected because the laser was tilted upward by 1 milliradian. (I have had to make some assumptions as you have given no details). Given that many lasers have a divergence of 0.5 to 1 milliradian, this is not unreasonable. Since you have no reason to claim otherwise an explanation is that your laser not may not be level.

Now, these may not be explanations that you like, but don't claim that no answers have been given. Also, I would suggest that if you want detailed answers you have to provide detailed questions. You *think* you have, but you haven't.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2018, 08:25:00 AM by Curiouser and Curiouser »

Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #18 on: August 17, 2018, 08:22:18 AM »
Well, I have had about enough of this.

Being a FE appears to be:

...

You realise most of the people picking holes in your argument aren’t FEers?


*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8290
  • Flat like a droplet of water.
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #19 on: August 17, 2018, 08:23:33 AM »
Well, I have had about enough of this.

Being a FE appears to be:

...

You realise most of the people picking holes in your argument aren’t FEers?

He hasn't been here long enough to realized that most of the people on this forum are not Flat Earthers.
Rabinoz RIP

*

JackBlack

  • 19032
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #20 on: August 17, 2018, 01:53:59 PM »
Why are you pulling apart a scenario, that you have no true idea if it is true or not?
If there are reasonable suspicions to think it is false people will pick it apart.
But just consider the alternative. What if it is false? Should people just accept that?

Here is an alternative for you to consider:
Someone comes and tells you that they went to Antarctica and kept going south and found an abrupt cliff.
All they could see beyond that was darkness and the cliff went down as far as they could see.
They ask how this is possible on a RE.
How do you respond?

I could say that "I am Tony the Tiger and I live on Mars with twenty of the Green Aliens from Toy Story"
Exactly.

Your laser story was highly suspect from the start and now you even admit you don't know if it was level. As such it is useless.

Then there is the issue that your conclusions don't always follow from your premises.
You claim to look at the ISS, and then conclude that it is flying over a spherical object. But how do you go from a to b?

The only reasonable argument given was the horizon.
The usual FE explanation is magic perspective or bendy light.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #21 on: August 17, 2018, 07:15:26 PM »
I will say only one thing . The pole star un moveable. Seen "under" eqator too. And if you will check it on cam all night you will see that all star in the sky turns around this star.
Incorrect! The pole star appears to move in a small circle about the North Celestial Pole.
It cannot be seen any significant distance south of the equator.
I live at about 27° south latitude and I most certainly cannot see Polaris!
But, I am told that "all stars in the sky turn around" Polaris but
I also know from my own observations that when I look due south all stars appear to rotate about a point roughly 30° above the southern horizon.

Quote from: Jjjei
Conclusion:
1).the north pole seen everywhere . The evidence of FLAT EARTH.
I know from personal experience that "the north pole" IS NOT "seen everywhere" so IS NOT "evidence of FLAT EARTH."

Quote from: Jjjei
2).all stars turns around it all night . The evidence of unmoveable earth.
Incorrect! How do you know it is the stars rotating and not the earth? So it IS NOT "evidence of an IMMOVEABLE EARTH."

Quote from: Jjjei
Thats all folks . Globeheads game over😆😉
Sorry your game never started, try again! But really the "game" for the flat earth was over more than two millenia ago! Get used to it.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2018, 10:22:18 PM by rabinoz »

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21049
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #22 on: August 18, 2018, 07:19:48 PM »

But, I am told that "all stars in the sky turn around" Polaris but
I also know from my own observations that when I look due south all stars appear to rotate about a point roughly 30° above the southern horizon.

So, you don't believe what you are told?
You rely on what you personally observe?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Flat Earth - Make me a believer
« Reply #23 on: August 18, 2018, 10:58:31 PM »

But, I am told that "all stars in the sky turn around" Polaris but
I also know from my own observations that when I look due south all stars appear to rotate about a point roughly 30° above the southern horizon.

So, you don't believe what you are told?
I don't believe that I said that and I do apologise if I implied it in this instance.
If what I am told is reasonable and consistent with my own observations I will usually believe it.

Quote from: Bullwinkle
You rely on what you personally observe?
Not entirely by any means but if "what I personally observe" and "what I am told" differ I do attempt to find out why.
Sometimes I am wrong, sometimes "what I am told" is incorrect and sometimes it's all too complicated for for my poor brain to understand.

Back in my younger days I (thought I) knew "all about" electronics (as one does when one is young) and when I first read about these transistor thingos in Radio an Hobbies, I knew that it had to be fake-news.
I knew that amplification without vacuum tubes was totally impossible! Little did I know!

But now, like Oscar Wilde, "I am not young enough to know everything"
And I find that like Einstein, "The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know"  Though that's probably way that  ;) I'm like Einstein ;).
Here endeth the first lesson on what I believe and why.