the web of knowledge

There is a web of web of facts that we all treat as certain. F=MA, periodic table, etc. These facts are interrelated, all the components of a cell follow the laws of physics, exposure to light can change chemicals, etc. This web of knowledge is used by engineers daily, expanded by scientists, and confirmed by students repeating experiments. This web of knowledge includes maps, sextants, GPS, navigation, space program, astronomy, eclipse prediction, etc etc etc.

This web of knowledge came about through centuries of solving problems, exploring, thinking, and reevaluating from epicycles and alchemy to the Hadron collider. It includes and has countless connections to RE. It works, and 99% of us treat it as all true successfully, our gadgets and navigation works and inconsistencies with this web are exceedingly rare.

What FE videos are doing is attacking these connections one at a time. There are an endless number, so if you are making money with FE videos, no shortage of new ones. The FE project is to cut out the RE part from this web, to demolish all those links to that web of knowledge (settled science). They are so eager to FE that finding one proof of the falsity of one link (actually some youtube video from an FE that does not stand up to critical analysis) is the joy of victory for them.

A basic idea about scientific theories is they should be predictive, ie if you heat water to 212F at sea level, it will turn to steam. FE has no prediction. Both FEs and REs can use Saros to predict eclipses, but FE can't explain why. RE can explain, FE is not explanatory. FE can't make a map nor do navigation. FE is not useful. FE can't predict, can't explain. If you are looking for endless improbable and problematic explanations, FE has that. Bendy light, NASA conspiracy, continuous acceleration forever, perspective, vanishing point, etc etc etc. Each new RE observation requires some distortion of reality, although one can always get angry, change the subject, or refuse to continue. Rube Goldberg would be impressed by FE explanations.

FE is almost solely the disconnection of RE from the web of knowledge. It is all about the world is not round, one logical connection at a time. No pinning down the conspiracy, the map, or anything else. It is the intellectual equivalent to throwing a rock through a window and laughing with enjoyment. But the windows do not break, and there are many many windows to throw those rocks through. The FEs delude that the window breaks, while 99% of us are wtf?

FE should build its own building to show the reality of FE and ignore RE. Why even bother tearing down RE when truth is on your side? They need all the time and energy they have to come up with the one true FE map, that is going to take a long time. Show us your predictions, your explanations, and your usefulness, all consistent with other known facts. RE has that. Time for FE to grow up.

There is a web of web of facts that we all treat as certain. F=MA, periodic table, etc. These facts are interrelated, all the components of a cell follow the laws of physics, exposure to light can change chemicals, etc. This web of knowledge is used by engineers daily, expanded by scientists, and confirmed by students repeating experiments. This web of knowledge includes maps, sextants, GPS, navigation, space program, astronomy, eclipse prediction, etc etc etc.

This web of knowledge came about through centuries of solving problems, exploring, thinking, and reevaluating from epicycles and alchemy to the Hadron collider. It includes and has countless connections to RE. It works, and 99% of us treat it as all true successfully, our gadgets and navigation works and inconsistencies with this web are exceedingly rare.

What FE videos are doing is attacking these connections one at a time. There are an endless number, so if you are making money with FE videos, no shortage of new ones. The FE project is to cut out the RE part from this web, to demolish all those links to that web of knowledge (settled science). They are so eager to FE that finding one proof of the falsity of one link (actually some youtube video from an FE that does not stand up to critical analysis) is the joy of victory for them.

A basic idea about scientific theories is they should be predictive, ie if you heat water to 212F at sea level, it will turn to steam. FE has no prediction. Both FEs and REs can use Saros to predict eclipses, but FE can't explain why. RE can explain, FE is not explanatory. FE can't make a map nor do navigation. FE is not useful. FE can't predict, can't explain. If you are looking for endless improbable and problematic explanations, FE has that. Bendy light, NASA conspiracy, continuous acceleration forever, perspective, vanishing point, etc etc etc. Each new RE observation requires some distortion of reality, although one can always get angry, change the subject, or refuse to continue. Rube Goldberg would be impressed by FE explanations.

FE is almost solely the disconnection of RE from the web of knowledge. It is all about the world is not round, one logical connection at a time.

Yet up to now, your attempt to demolish and disprove FE has been to attack one FE proposition at a time.

OK, sometimes you mentioned two things when you started yet another thread.

Maybe learning *is* possible.

That does not change the fact that RE is integrated into the web of knowledge and FE must invalidate all such links to be seen as "true".

It does not change the fact that FE has no such links to the web of knowledge. REs are not severing the links with the web of knowledge.

Eclipses arer explained by the motion of sun, earth, and moon. This ties into geometry, history, physics, optics, etc. FE agrees on the cycles (duh), but offers endless speculation on a real explanation that ties into no other observations. Another example is celestial navigation, ties together astronomy, geometry, engineering, history, etc. There is no FE explanation for how a sextant works, at least none that correctly tie into physics and astronomy.

A FE has to invalidate the sextant and eclipse prediction, but RE does these things continuously.

A RE might still argue a FE claim, but he does not have to sever that claim from the web of knowledge. At least until FE integrates it corre3ctly. I doubt that will ever be tried. FE does not go for deep closure. It thrives on vagueness and does not complete the theory, it moves on to the next breathless claim.

We are doing one of two things. Some REs are desperately trying to help FEs straighten out their thinking on this topic. Others are mocking and goading into ever more ridiculous explanations to make them look dumb.

The distance from Capetown SA to Melbourne Aus is reported by the web to be 10,300 km.

The airline fights report the same distance. The speed of the airliners and the travel time matches the schedule.

If you go to each of these places and GPS and then do the 3d geometry math, you will get the same answer.

Use a compass and a sextant to determine your location by celestial navigation and get the same answer

The Volvo yacht race goes between these at known sailboat speeds, GPS on board every boat, and they leave and arrive at times matching that distance travelled at sail boat speed, positions tracked on the boat and at race headquarters 24/7.

This all measures the same as (scaled down) a good ole' globe.

Night and day and seasons in Capetown and Melbourne match up to RE explanation.

Perhaps REs can list more facts that match up the distance between Melbourne and Capetwon.

To cut RE out of the web of knowledge, you must disprove all these and many others or find some Rube Goldberg explanation for each of them.

Someday you'll learn to hit reply!

FES will NOT stay on topic and address the issue of the original post and pin down a reliable answer.

If they did, I would have conversations within a thread and be quite happy about it.

I keep trying to pin things down, and it turns into everything but converging on truth.

Consider making your posts more interesting.

FES will NOT stay on topic and address the issue of the original post and pin down a reliable answer.

If they did, I would have conversations within a thread and be quite happy about it.

I keep trying to pin things down, and it turns into everything but converging on truth.

A face-to-face discussion with a whiteboard would sort this within minutes.

Inquisitive,

I do not think it would. I have tried that with the FE I know. Subject change, just refuse to reply, anger, and my favorite, we don't know yet, just sure you are wrong, many responses other than patiently checking your facts and logic.

Would a person willing to patiently check facts and logic believe FE? No, FEs are not looking to pin down the truth in multiple ways a s lawyer or professor or detective would.

They are defending their position with motivated reasoning.

Inquisitive,

I do not think it would. I have tried that with the FE I know. Subject change, just refuse to reply, anger, and my favorite, we don't know yet, just sure you are wrong, many responses other than patiently checking your facts and logic.

Would a person willing to patiently check facts and logic believe FE? No, FEs are not looking to pin down the truth in multiple ways a s lawyer or professor or detective would.

They are defending their position with motivated reasoning.

All a bit sad.

What is so sad about admitting you don't know the answer?

What is so sad about admitting you don't know the answer?

100% confident about science facts.  Professional knowledge of GPS operation.

What is so sad about admitting you don't know the answer?

There is nothing "sad about admitting you don't know the answer?" or in not knowing all the answers. No-one does!

But what is sad is holding a belief on the flimsiest evidence, such as "The earth looks flat", against all the overwhelming contrary evidence and "admitting you don't know the answer" as to why you hold that belief.

There is one here, who shall remain nameless, whose only real arguments against the Globe seem to against NASA, the Lunar landings and the whole space industry.
This one who shall remain nameless never seems to have any serious arguments against a spherical earth, though I suspect that it might be for religious reasons.

That makes me sad.

What is sad is that the human brain is more aligned with group coordination, personal feelings, and defense of existing beliefs than in finding truth through logic and facts.

FE is just one tiny bit of the problems produced by the tribal brain that puts feelings over logic.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on February 01, 2019, 12:22:19 PM

What is so sad about admitting you don't know the answer?

100% confident about science facts.  Professional knowledge of GPS operation.

Then you're not a scientist.

Quote from: inquisitive on February 01, 2019, 12:46:42 PM

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on February 01, 2019, 12:22:19 PM

What is so sad about admitting you don't know the answer?

100% confident about science facts.  Professional knowledge of GPS operation.

Then you're not a scientist.

Do you have an explanation of GPS operation?

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on February 01, 2019, 02:55:11 PM

Quote from: inquisitive on February 01, 2019, 12:46:42 PM

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on February 01, 2019, 12:22:19 PM

What is so sad about admitting you don't know the answer?

100% confident about science facts.  Professional knowledge of GPS operation.

Then you're not a scientist.

Do you have an explanation of GPS operation?

What's that got to do with thinking science is about knowing the answers?

Web of science is an online subscription based scientific citation indexing service originally produced by the institute for scientific information later maintained by clarivate analytics that provides a comprehensive citation search. The web of sites provides web access to the science citation index expended social science citation index art and humanities citation index. The web of science is one database from thomson reuters part of it is web of knowledge.

Web of science is an online subscription based scientific citation indexing service originally produced by the institute for scientific information later maintained by clarivate analytics that provides a comprehensive citation search. The web of sites provides web access to the science citation index expended social science citation index art and humanities citation index. The web of science is one database from thomson reuters part of it is web of knowledge.

Did Wikipedia finally become sentient?