Mega Thread The Flat Earth Mega thread.

[Heisenberg_]

Padded cell lol,why not go the whole hog with the hyperbole and mention straight jackets as well.

Note I wasn't referring to those pushing the earth is flat line, as stupid as I I think it is.
More the people who actually think that the edge of the world has giant ice walls under guard by NASA. Anybody who believes that is even possible is certifiably insane.

 

[cannot]

I don't know why i am bothering to post in here, but this retort to the big bang theory annoys me more than anything.

How is believing in a theory based on the knowledge/evidence we currently have available to us all that much worse than believe in something just because someone wrote it down (the history of how our holy books came to be is littered with less than solid processes)? Furthermore, and here is the kicker for me, even if the book actually did accurately explain how earth and humans came to be, it doesn't explain who made god, where this god resides, is god metaphorical? a physical being? if so, what properties does his environment have? is he alone? where were the building blocks, for everything we know, actually taken from? etc etc etc. You can't discount and mock a theory based on current evidences, and instead favour one that not only goes against evidence, but also raises more even bigger questions, but then not bother trying to explain those bigger questions. They can't be explained which is why it called "faith".

Have a cursory look at history, and how science works, things progress from faith, to theory, to law. We move through this process with experimentation to acquire evidence. Why stop at faith just because it suits you and because the acquisition of evidence is fraught with challenges and many wrong turns? Even laws have been found to have holes in them but are accurate enough for the purposes we require of them. We never actually stop trying to improve on current knowledge.

I am 100% open to there being a creator, I am 100% open to the earth being flat. However you will need to provide me an argument for both that doesn't require me to ignore available evidence while simultaneously having blind faith in "facts" that would need to exist to make the argument plausible.

The secret to gaining accurate knowledge is to start by being open to all possibilities no matter how unlikely.

hey man nice post, IMO: from a neutral perspective, the big bang is nae less 'whacky' than the first part of the bible - take your own advice and look into the soceity of jesus, the people that made up the big bang theory and see what you reckon of their track record

 

[darthbards]

Note I wasn't referring to those pushing the earth is flat line, as stupid as I I think it is.
More the people who actually think that the edge of the world has giant ice walls under guard by NASA. Anybody who believes that is even possible is certifiably insane.

Fair enough,still pretty hyperbolic putting them in padded cells though.
I'd say there are some question marks over the ice wall,just as there are some serious questions regarding dark matter or the Big Bang.The ice wall is just more in your face guess because it's not preached in the mainstream.

 

[macmate]

hey man nice post, IMO: from a neutral perspective, the big bang is not less 'whacky' than the first part of the bible - take your own advice and look into the soceity of jesus, the people that made up the big bang theory and see what you reckon of their track record

The difference is that the big bang theory can't stand on its own behind the veil of faith, it has to be and will forever have to stand the challenges of other theories. It isn't a law as yet and as such not challenging it would be doing science a disfavour. The bible doesn't have to stand this test as it stays in the "faith" status and as such requires an indisputable alternative for believers to stop believing. This difference in burden of proof means that plenty of theories eventually either get refined, improved or thrown out but sees faith stands untouched.

Governments and institutions have done plenty of underhand things to protect themselves and their interests, but history shows we have a pretty good track record of getting to the bottom of those things.

Might the big bang theory be dropped for a better theory? sure. It might be slightly different or it might be radically different. Either way that's a good thing. If it happens to stand the test of time then that's a good thing too.

 

[darthbards]

The difference is that the big bang theory can't stand on its own behind the veil of faith, it has to be and will forever have to stand the challenges of other theories. It isn't a law as yet and as such not challenging it would be doing science a disfavour. The bible doesn't have to stand this test as it stays in the "faith" status and as such requires an indisputable alternative for believes to stop believing. This difference in burden of proof means that plenty of theories eventually either get refined, improved or thrown out but sees faith stand untouched.

Governments and institutions have done plenty of underhand things to protect themselves and their interests, but history shows we have a pretty good track record of getting to the bottom of those things.

Might the big bang theory be dropped for a better theory? sure. It might be slightly different or it might be radically different. Either way that's a good thing. If it happens to stand the test of time then that's a good thing too.

Where have you been all this time,finally someone apart from cannot talking sense.
Personally I have no issue with the bible standing behind a vail of faith,they make no real bones about it and even call their religion a faith. As long as there is no law I have to go to church I couldn't really care less.
I'm also thinking the Big Bang in time will be overhauled majorly,if not dropped all together.

I think we could even find with the round and flat earth,that the truth may lay somewhere in the middle,some sort of 2 dimensional thing.

 

[macmate]

Where have you been all this time,finally someone apart from cannot talking sense.
Personally I have no issue with the bible standing behind a vail of faith,they make no real bones about it and even call their religion a faith. As long as there is no law I have to go to church I couldn't really care less.
I'm also thinking the Big Bang in time will be overhauled majorly,if not dropped all together.

I think we could even find with the round and flat earth,that the truth may lay somewhere in the middle,some sort of 2 dimensional thing.

I don't doubt there will be some tinkering to the theory but considering the law of averages and on the balance of probability, it's likely to be closer to the mark than anything else. I like to make the analogy of a puzzle, a massive 10000 piece puzzle. We start off putting pieces together that seem to fit, we step back as we are going and see parts of the picture taking shape, and sometimes we have to go back and swap some pieces because they didn't fit as perfectly as we thought as they don't allow the right connections to be made, however, on the whole, we start to see a pretty accurate picture take place, even without it being complete.

In regards to my opinion as it stands now. In other words if I had to put the house on something, it would be that the earth is well and truly round, there is no 'being creator' and that big bang theory is closest to being correct of any theory we have. I can't guarantee any of those things, but if that's what i needed in order to be happy with my stance, then any faith wouldn't ever come into consideration either.

 

[darthbards]

And to get this thread back to what it actually should be, the Flat Earth believers proving that the Earth is flat and disproving that it is round (which consistently gets ignored) I will ask the following questions that I require answers to:

1. How actually does a sunset go below the horizon and a sunrise come from beyond the horizon? I witnessed this occur last evening while watching my beautiful wife during her pregnancy photo shoot (and took photos myself) and I witness it on regular occasions. But how, ahem, on Earth does that happen if the Sun is supposed to just zoom off in to the distance? My eyes most certainly didn't deceive me and the Sun most certainly did not get much smaller and smaller in size like it's 'supposed' to.

2. How do Lunar Eclipses occur? All of a sudden the Moon goes behind the flat Earth accidentally I guess. Something like that.

3. If the Moon was so close, how come different parts of the world see the same side of the moon? If it's only 3000 miles away then surely people who are beyond the other side of the moon would see that other side, but they don't.

4. If the Earth is flat, then how can we accurately predict exactly where the ISS was, where the ISS is and where the ISS will be (channelling Bret 'The Hitman' Hart for a moment) when those predictions are entirely based upon a round Earth model? You can do this too and prove it yourself. When you see that the ISS is tracking near you, you can look out for it.

5. Just how many people would need to be in on the conspiracy? It would be an utterly extraordinary amount of people that would need to know the Earth is flat but that we need to ensure the rest of the public don't find out. Why haven't the space agencies of other countries come out and shocked the world by informing us that what we have been taught is wrong? The Chinese would love to do something like that, I'm sure. How about pilots, meteorologists, scientists, physicists, etc., etc. coming out and spilling the beans? Why is my brother-in-law (a previously qualified pilot) lying to me, my sister, my family, his kids, his friends all of these years? Why would he do that?

And also for the, I don't know maybe 6th time, how about the points in this link are questioned or at least attempted to be questioned by those that have been asked of them previously? https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-t...14-ways-the-flat-earth-theory-is-false.t7148/

1. Been done already. I know I said I'd outline it again,but I'll just answer the other questions. Apologies but there has been a bit of discussion already including pictures and further explanations right down to all the components of the atmolayer

2. An eclipse occurs when the shadow object passes between the sun and the moon. The shadow object is a satellite that orbits the sun. The eclipse occurs when the sun,moon and shadow object are in line and the moon crosses in front of the Suns orbital plane at a point known as the node. We never see the shadow object due to the brightness of the sun.

3. This is explained by the observers standing either side of the moon. If on one side it appears right side up,on the other upside down. This is best explained by suspending an arrow horizontally above your head pointing north. If you stand to the south of the arrow it is pointing 'downward' towards the northern horizon. Stand to the north of it,looking back at it,it points upwards above your head to the north.

4&5. This is pretty much the same answer and what people keep going round in circles about. We don't totally know. Same argument could be put forward that we don't know why we have to believe in Gravity,dark matter,dark energy or the Big Bang,or why we are being lied to about that. All this has been discussed previously also. As for how many people or why they would lie? Again not sure,we could speculate but that would be speculation. Threats of severe painful death,mind control drugs or something else could be possible.

It's also possible everything could just be computer chips with a computer code.
The 25-30% chance the earth is round,in the model we are being taught,is also possible.

 

[cannot]

Stop deflecting and get on to answering my queries.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i dont see the previous comments you refer to as deflecting. How we see and sense the world around us is fairly on topic to the FE discussion. Sagan didnt say

those that go against the grain of the accepted norm of society
or
disagree with something that has been taught for a long time now

.. he said extraordinaire claims do. given our eyes and senses give us the belief the world is flat and motionless, the larger claim (extraordinary) is what we are taught. thats my interpretation anywho

hence i found Occam's razor on point as it back this up for mine. flat and still is more simple than all the bullshit

 

[Sixpence]

In regards to my opinion as it stands now. In other words if I had to put the house on something, it would be that the earth is well and truly round, there is no 'being creator' and that big bang theory is closest to being correct of any theory we have. I can't guarantee any of those things, but if that's what i needed in order to be happy with my stance, then any faith wouldn't ever come into consideration either.

I'd bet both my nuts on this and would be fairly confident of not just keeping my nuts but winning a few spares along the way!

 

[Thrawn]

 

[katana]

listened to a bit of this. following is my issues:

- relentless ad hominem in the first minute, logical fallacy. disregard
- asking why someone would lie about the shape of the earth is not addressing evidence
- the 'sky man' strawman @ 1:14 and a whole bunch in the next minute, pointless and quite embarrassing for someone who purports to be of science to be making elementary mistakes

after that i realised the guy was trying to prove the shape of the earth, and more broadly the accepted and taught cosmology, via models. which is pretty ******ed. yes, anyone knows that the map is not the terrain. is the globe in my room the earth? no. does that mean the earth is not a ball? no.

so basically i stopped after 5-minutes because i have better things to do.

 

[katana]

the creationist argument is as blatantly irrelevant as the obviously unscientific evolution theory.

 

[Thrawn]

after that i realised the guy was trying to prove the shape of the earth, and more broadly the accepted and taught cosmology, via models. which is pretty ******ed.

No what's pretty ****ed is people like you believing the Earth is flat because some moron like Eric Dubay says it is.

The video gave a great example of the sun rising and setting and how if the Earth was flat it would look different for people in different locations.


This guy is incredibly patient and resilient, if you're so offended about ad hominems.

 

[shaky]

The truth.
Don't know about you but i don't like being lied to.

Haha
So you are saying you don't like yourself very much then??
That's a shame.....

 

[Heisenberg_]

listened to a bit of this. following is my issues:

- relentless ad hominem in the first minute, logical fallacy. disregard
- asking why someone would lie about the shape of the earth is not addressing evidence
- the 'sky man' strawman @ 1:14 and a whole bunch in the next minute, pointless and quite embarrassing for someone who purports to be of science to be making elementary mistakes

after that i realised the guy was trying to prove the shape of the earth, and more broadly the accepted and taught cosmology, via models. which is pretty ******ed. yes, anyone knows that the map is not the terrain. is the globe in my room the earth? no. does that mean the earth is not a ball? no.

so basically i stopped after 5-minutes because i have better things to do.

It's not really any different to the video you posted then in the OP then, you just disregarded it though because it's not what you want to hear?

 

[Judd2Sewell]

listened to a bit of this. following is my issues:

- relentless ad hominem in the first minute, logical fallacy. disregard
- asking why someone would lie about the shape of the earth is not addressing evidence
- the 'sky man' strawman @ 1:14 and a whole bunch in the next minute, pointless and quite embarrassing for someone who purports to be of science to be making elementary mistakes

after that i realised the guy was trying to prove the shape of the earth, and more broadly the accepted and taught cosmology, via models. which is pretty ******ed. yes, anyone knows that the map is not the terrain. is the globe in my room the earth? no. does that mean the earth is not a ball? no.

so basically i stopped after 5-minutes because i have better things to do.

hahahahahaha

 

[darthbards]

It seems a few people aren't entirely happy with some of the evidence that has been put forward by the flat earth society in comparison to any evidence they may have for other theories obtained through their own personally education or brainwashing or whatever other means.

Do we all agree the flat earth society should be given greater grants for more detailed scientific research into their theories?

 

[Judd2Sewell]

It seems a few people aren't entirely happy with some of the evidence that has been put forward by the flat earth society in comparison to any evidence they may have for other theories obtained through their own personally education or brainwashing or whatever other means.

Do we all agree the flat earth society should be given greater grants for more detailed scientific research into their theories?

No. Because it is completely laughable and would be an utter waste of money.

Just one of these loonies can prove/disprove their own theory by flying around the world. It's just that simple.

 

[00Stinger]

Just a few points to debunk the stupid flat Earth theory.

1. If Earth is flat, how can billions of people see two different sets of constellations rotating in opposite directions, around two opposite poles? How can people in the southern hemisphere essentially stand in a circle with their backs to each other, and all be facing the same southern constellation?

2. Anyone may observe Earth curvature at sea level depthwise (going away from you) by viewing through a telephoto/zoom which greatly flattens depth. For instance go 100kms out to sea from melbourne, look back in to the city with a telescope and it will look like the city skyline is below the ocean, how can you explain this if the Earth is flat?

3. Billions of people observe the Sun set below horizon daily. How would this be possible if it was a flat Earth? Not to mention the sun rises in the east and sets in the west every day. If the Earth was flat, would that mean we see a new sun every day? if not how does it start back in it's original place?

4. And obvioulsy it would be an implausibly mammoth conspiracy requiring involvement of over 50 space agencies around the world, and every news agency, all telecommunications companies, and shipping companies, and universities, and millions of dedicated professional physicists, engineers, meteorologists, pilots, navigators, oceanographers, cartographers, are all lying, bribed or threatened into participating in a global super conspiracy of the last century, along with their families, without any clear motive, and without a single leak or whistle blower, not one single, deathbed confession or drunken admission ever. All for the gain of what, exactly?

 

[darthbards]

Just a few points to debunk the stupid flat Earth theory.

1. If Earth is flat, how can billions of people see two different sets of constellations rotating in opposite directions, around two opposite poles? How can people in the southern hemisphere essentially stand in a circle with their backs to each other, and all be facing the same southern constellation?

2. Anyone may observe Earth curvature at sea level depthwise (going away from you) by viewing through a telephoto/zoom which greatly flattens depth. For instance go 100kms out to sea from melbourne, look back in to the city with a telescope and it will look like the city skyline is below the ocean, how can you explain this if the Earth is flat?

3. Billions of people observe the Sun set below horizon daily. How would this be possible if it was a flat Earth? Not to mention the sun rises in the east and sets in the west every day. If the Earth was flat, would that mean we see a new sun every day? if not how does it start back in it's original place?

4. And obvioulsy it would be an implausibly mammoth conspiracy requiring involvement of over 50 space agencies around the world, and every news agency, all telecommunications companies, and shipping companies, and universities, and millions of dedicated professional physicists, engineers, meteorologists, pilots, navigators, oceanographers, cartographers, are all lying, bribed or threatened into participating in a global super conspiracy of the last century, along with their families, without any clear motive, and without a single leak or whistle blower, not one single, deathbed confession or drunken admission ever. All for the gain of what, exactly?

Read the posts in the thread.Questions two and three have been explained in great detail.
Question four has been touched upon but no solid ideas known outside what I'd consider speculation.
Have you also read the links supplied in the op?

 

[00Stinger]

Read the posts in the thread.Questions two and three have been explained in great detail.
Question four has been touched upon but no solid ideas known outside what I'd consider speculation.
Have you also read the links supplied in the op?

The links in the op have been taken down.

There is no answer to this though, I'm curious to know what the rebuttal is

If Earth is flat, how can billions of people see two different sets of constellations rotating in opposite directions, around two opposite poles? How can people in the southern hemisphere essentially stand in a circle with their backs to each other, and all be facing the same southern constellation?

 

[cannot]

hahahahahaha

its funny, cause they are the majority of your mediocre points?

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Just a few points to debunk the stupid flat Earth theory.

1. If Earth is flat, how can billions of people see two different sets of constellations rotating in opposite directions, around two opposite poles? How can people in the southern hemisphere essentially stand in a circle with their backs to each other, and all be facing the same southern constellation?

2. Anyone may observe Earth curvature at sea level depthwise (going away from you) by viewing through a telephoto/zoom which greatly flattens depth. For instance go 100kms out to sea from melbourne, look back in to the city with a telescope and it will look like the city skyline is below the ocean, how can you explain this if the Earth is flat?

3. Billions of people observe the Sun set below horizon daily. How would this be possible if it was a flat Earth? Not to mention the sun rises in the east and sets in the west every day. If the Earth was flat, would that mean we see a new sun every day? if not how does it start back in it's original place?

4. And obvioulsy it would be an implausibly mammoth conspiracy requiring involvement of over 50 space agencies around the world, and every news agency, all telecommunications companies, and shipping companies, and universities, and millions of dedicated professional physicists, engineers, meteorologists, pilots, navigators, oceanographers, cartographers, are all lying, bribed or threatened into participating in a global super conspiracy of the last century, along with their families, without any clear motive, and without a single leak or whistle blower, not one single, deathbed confession or drunken admission ever. All for the gain of what, exactly?

The only answer is that you're an illuminati plant and in on the conspiracy! Flat earth confirmed!

 

[Judd2Sewell]

its funny, cause they are the majority of your mediocre points?

your arguments are simply not worthy of anything but complete and utter contempt.

this rubbish has gone on long enough.

prove to us all that the earth is actually flat.

enlighten us all as to why anyone would ever bother trying to suppress this 'truth,' what the hell is the point? to make people pay more when they fly? seriously, you loonies have literally nothing to offer this debate beyond your own dignity and backsides to be laughed at and spanked respectively.

 

[darthbards]

The links in the op have been taken down.

There is no answer to this though, I'm curious to know what the rebuttal is

If Earth is flat, how can billions of people see two different sets of constellations rotating in opposite directions, around two opposite poles? How can people in the southern hemisphere essentially stand in a circle with their backs to each other, and all be facing the same southern constellation?

Apologies,I was aware the links are down but forgot. You can do further research though via Google.

The stars in the sky are not one system,the stars are in what is known as clusters that form one central body. Each star in a cluster is attracted to one another by what is known as a vector. All the clusters are moving around a common barycentre,this is the same barycentre the sun and moon orbit around.