An Analogy For a Flat Earth/Round Earth Debate

Person 1: Coca-cola and Pepsi have identicle ingredients.
Person 2: No they don't.
Person 1: Well, they taste the same to me.
Person 2: They don't taste the same. Besides, the ingredients are right on the bottle, and they're clearly not the same.
Person 1: That's a conspiracy. The labels are wrong.
Person 2: Why would there be a conspiracy?
Person 1: Because Pepsi and Coca-Cola have the same ingredients.
Person 2: No, they don't.
Person 1: Then why do they taste the same?
Person 2: They don't. And I have evidence to prove that the ingredients aren't the same, but you don't have have any at all.
Person 1: I think they do, and evidence is part of the conspiracy.
Person 2: *sighs and gives up*

Guess which side is which?

HAHAHA

Your conversation should read:

Person 1: Coca-cola and Pepsi have identical ingredients.
Person 2: No they don't.
Person 1: Well, based upon my experiments and observations I conclude that they do.
Person 2: Your experiments were rubbish, because the drinks have different ingredients. Besides, the ingredients are right on the bottle, and they're clearly not the same.
Person 1:  The labels are wrong.
Person 2: What makes you think they're wrong?
Person 1: Because Pepsi and Coca-Cola have the same ingredients.
Person 2: No, they don't.
Person 1: Then why does every experiment we've performed and every observation we've made indicate that they do?
Person 2: They don't. And I have evidence to prove that the ingredients aren't the same, but you don't have have any at all.
Person 1: I think they do, and my evidence is based on personal observation and experimentation. While yours is based on nothing but other people's data, which you have no way of verifying
Person 2: *rants angrily then gives up*

Geoguy, if you're that desperate to find out for yourself, why don't you go trekking across Antarctica.

If you die the world will be a better place.

People have done it before. Now, try it for yourself.

geoguy, in your version, why have you removed the conspiracy part? that is the backbone to the FE argument.

The conspiracy is a prediction made by the FE theory. Nothing more. It certainly isn't the "backbone" of the theory as we use it to explain nothing not directly related to government activities.

psshhaa! anything that goes against your bullshit theory, you guys are screaming "wahhh!!! conspiracy!!!"

Person 1: I think they do, and my evidence is based on personal observation and experimentation.

Are you still referring to how the horizon is flat when you look at it?  If not, please send me a link to that discussion.  If there's no discussion, then please create one wherein we can talk about your personal observations and experimentation.

Edit:  my appologies.  Analogy accepted.

Your conversation should read:

Person 1: I think they do, and my evidence is based on personal observation and experimentation. While yours is based on nothing but other people's data, which you have no way of verifying

Geoguy, what experiment, besides looking out the window (the moral equivalent to thinking they taste the same) have you ever done to convince you the earth is flat? If you are taking Samuel Rowbotham's word, how is that any different from what the round-earther is doing?

Your conversation should read:
Person 1: Coca-cola and Pepsi have identical ingredients.
Person 2: No they don't.
Person 1: Well, based upon my experiments and observations I conclude that they do.
Person 2: Your experiments were rubbish, because the drinks have different ingredients. Besides, the ingredients are right on the bottle, and they're clearly not the same.
Person 1:  ...

Guys, I want to know. Do FErs believe that Coca-Cola and Pepsi have identical ingredients, because if not, you bastards just shot your own argument in the freaking knee.

Its an ANALOGY.

The content of it is not meant to be taken litterally

psshhaa! anything that goes against your bullshit theory, you guys are screaming "wahhh!!! conspiracy!!!"

Where have I seen something like this before?

Person 2: *rants angrily then gives up*

Oh, yeah!  Silly me.

A better analogy would be a hypothetical 16th century discussion about witches.

Person 1 :  It seems to me like witches don't exist because the only evidence I have is what church leaders and the government tell me.

Person 2:  But everyone believes in witches! How could we all be wrong?

Person 1:  Because of scientific evidence.

Person 2:  But why would the church and the government lie to us about witches?

Person 1:  To gain wealth and power.

Person 2:  That's completely absurd. Besides, people have seen witches perform magic! How do you explain eyewitness accounts?

Person 1:  They were fabricated by the church.

Person 2:  You're crazy! I can't believe that in this day and age people could believe witches and magic don't exist!

Guess who's who!

A better analogy would be a hypothetical 16th century discussion about witches.

Quote

Person 1 :  It seems to me like witches don't exist because the only evidence I have is what church leaders and the government tell me.

Person 2:  But everyone believes in witches! How could we all be wrong?

Person 1:  Because of scientific evidence.

Person 2:  But why would the church and the government lie to us about witches?

Person 1:  To gain wealth and power.

Person 2:  That's completely absurd. Besides, people have seen witches perform magic! How do you explain eyewitness accounts?

Person 1:  They were fabricated by the church.

Person 2:  You're crazy! I can't believe that in this day and age people could believe witches and magic don't exist!

Guess who's who!

That's awesome, Dogplatter.

Person 1 :  It seems to me like witches don't exist because the only evidence I have is what church leaders and the government tell me.

Person 2:  But everyone believes in witches! How could we all be wrong?

Person 1:  Because of scientific evidence.

Person 2:  But why would the church and the government lie to us about witches?

Person 1:  To gain wealth and power.

Person 2:  That's completely absurd. Besides, people have seen witches perform magic! How do you explain eyewitness accounts?

Person 1:  They were fabricated by the church.

Person 2:  You're crazy! I can't believe that in this day and age people could believe witches and magic don't exist!

This is, once again, the really useful, worthwhile thing FErs have to say. Things after it seem to break down a bit, but this? I would thank you just for bringing this up.

A better analogy would be a hypothetical 16th century discussion about witches.

Quote

Person 1 :  It seems to me like witches don't exist because the only evidence I have is what church leaders and the government tell me.

Person 2:  But everyone believes in witches! How could we all be wrong?

Person 1:  Because of scientific evidence.

Person 2:  But why would the church and the government lie to us about witches?

Person 1:  To gain wealth and power.

Person 2:  That's completely absurd. Besides, people have seen witches perform magic! How do you explain eyewitness accounts?

Person 1:  They were fabricated by the church.

Person 2:  You're crazy! I can't believe that in this day and age people could believe witches and magic don't exist!

Guess who's who!

the witches thing was not a conspiracy thing, people were superstitious in those times, people didnt gain money out of it :S

The Puritans got rid of enemies/people they didn't like that way.

the people that the puritans didnt like and burned were people they considered heretics, of which witches were a small category. They didn't like people they considered to be unreligious. They even banned Christmas at one point.