Flat Earth - It's NOT Ridiculous

[pitabread]

Conclusion: No direct flights exist between Sydney and Santiago, and all flight listings are fake.

Really? Does this mean even Expedia is in on the conspiracy?

I mean, who do we even trust anymore?

 

[Radagast]

I mean, who do we even trust anymore?

They trust nobody -- nobody except the one or two YouTubers that control them.

 

[SpiritualBeing]

I always thought these people were trolls but then I started to meet some really unintelligent people. So unintelligent they didn’t know basic geography questions like what continent they lived on. At that point I realized how truly dumb people can be. Borderline retarded just like this thread.

 

[Strong in Him]

I gave point after point as to why one can draw a reasonable conclusion the earth is flat and motionless, as the scriptures themselves proclaim.

I don't think the Scriptures say any such thing.

The Holy Scriptures are not a scientific textbook; it is not their purpose to explain, scientifically, how, or when, the world was created. People may talk about "the ends of the earth"; does that mean the world has ends and if we go too far we can fall off? No, it's a way of saying "all over the world/to every last bit of the world." People may have written about the earth having 4 corners; does that mean it's square, or rectangular? No, it probably means "from every part of the world" or every direction. People may have written about the earth having pillars. Does it? If so, what are they standing on? Supposing one of them wears out or breaks one day?

Taking Scripture literally can sometimes raise all sorts of problems - not to mention the fact that we may make it say something that its authors never intended.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I don't think the Scriptures say any such thing.

The Holy Scriptures are not a scientific textbook; it is not their purpose to explain, scientifically, how, or when, the world was created. People may talk about "the ends of the earth"; does that mean the world has ends and if we go too far we can fall off? No, it's a way of saying "all over the world/to every last bit of the world." People may have written about the earth having 4 corners; does that mean it's square, or rectangular? No, it probably means "from every part of the world" or every direction. People may have written about the earth having pillars. Does it? If so, what are they standing on? Supposing one of them wears out or breaks one day?

Taking Scripture literally can sometimes raise all sorts of problems - not to mention the fact that we may make it say something that its authors never intended.

Indeed - and the fact that there have been days of argument between someone who claims the Bible teaches a round Earth and someone who claims it describes a flat Earth, indicates the Bible is not an unambiguous reference for the shape of the Earth.

 

[High Fidelity]

At the end of all things when all truth is revealed at the latest.

So your argument for things you don't agree with, despite incontrovertible proof, is that 'we'll find out one day'.

That's a bit silly, isn't it...?

 

[mama2one]

.

 

[Ophiolite]

Okay... Why do YOU believe Earth is a sphere?

I don't believe the Earth is a sphere. I know it is, by definition, a geoid. More precisely it approximates an oblate spheroid. This knowledge derives from observations such as:

• The spherical character of all other observed large astronomical bodies
• Diurnal patterns of light and dark
  
• Seasonal variations of the same that are complementary in opposite hemispheres.
• The horizon's appearance from high altitude orbit
• The effectivness of dynamic calculations for the placement of satellites that would not be possible on a flat Earth
• Etc.

Those who believe in a flat Earth because they are ignorant of evidence such as this are simply that: objectively ignorant. There is no shame in that.
Those who continue to believe in a flat Earth after being presented with such evidence are also ignorant, but now in the perjorative sense of the word.
Those who assert a believe in a Flat Earth because it provokes some people are no longer funny.
Those who believe in a Flat Earth because the mainstream view is doubtless promoted by corrupt politicians, or inept scientists, or the Illuminati, or covert aliens, are delusional and should seek psychiatric help.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Good video on why the horizon is flat but the Earth is spherical.

 

[Brightmoon]

="Zetetica, post: 73648111, member: 415955"]Why assume gravity exists? That mass attracts mass, purely of itself and not due to any sort of magnetic force?
Gravity isn’t a strong force it’s just unrelenting, any plastic (in the sense of moldable ) body is going to eventually form a sphere . Gravity isn’t strong you can pull your foot away from the gravitational attraction of the entire earth and take a step. But you’ll never be able to hold that foot up for more than few minutes

Do day and night make sense on a flat Earth? They can. Have you researched into it? Even just out of curiosity?
Day and night really don’t make sense on a flat earth . They artificially limit the amount of light reaching from th sun in order to make that work

You can't see the South Pole or China, or any other ridiculously distant land from New York because ... We don't see infinitely far, atmospheric distortion, and simply how our eyes work (field of vision).

True! But you’d be able to see the bottom of a tall distant object on a flat earth and you can’t because the curvature hides it
Determining latitude by Polaris isn't possible on a flat model? Why?

Because you shouldn’t be able to see Polaris from below the equator and on a flat earth you’d have to be able to

 

[Freodin]

Why assume gravity exists? That mass attracts mass, purely of itself and not due to any sort of magnetic force?

That is an interesting question... if you really want to learn something about it, and really want to get an answer.

We have, based on some centuries of research, experimentation and theoretical explanations, a rather good understanding of the phenomenon of electromagnetism. We can measure it... we can use it. In fact, we use it constantly and our theoretical models conform very well to the observations and applications we make.

The force of attraction between masses does not fit within this system. Again, based on observations and experimentations, we have found that this force is only dependent on mass, and not on electromagnetic charge. If that wasn't the case, we would observe objects with different charge or magnetic structure fall differently, for example.

But we don't. So this attractive force is not some kind of electromagnetic effect that we know of. It is a different kind of effect.
Because it is not influenced by the principles behind electromagnetism, it cannot be some "sort of magnetic force".

So it it something different, a different attractive force. We just have to give it a name... and because it makes objects heavy... we call it "heaviness". Or, because scientists like to give things names in or derived from Latin: "gravity".

 

[inquiring mind]

Even though I believe academia and the scientific community are wrong in regard to some things, like macroevolution for example, I do think they have the ‘earth is a sphere thing’ nailed.

 

[Brightmoon]

Even though I believe academia and the scientific community are wrong in regard to some things, like macroevolution for example, I do think they have the ‘earth is a sphere thing’ nailed.

I also know that the scientific community has the sphere thing ‘nailed’ . Just FYI they’ve got the macroevolution thing nailed too. You might have learned some creation “science” terminology but the truth is speciation is actually macroevolution

 

[Whyayeman]

There is so much very good evidence that the earth is a sphere, many posted by Zetetica herself. The 'evidence for flatness is contrived and contrarian. Contrived because it attempts to deny observation; Contrarian because its claims are generally contrary to the huge body of science.

All science must be provisional, and we must be ready to modify established understandings in the face of new evidence. Flat earth theories do not come close to challenging science. I am afraid Zetetica's repeated questions have all been satisfactorily answered, many of them long ago. Actually the Ancient Greeks were clear on the subject; Renaissance thinkers were too.

Flat Earth proponents have an agenda to undermine proper rigorous science. I don't understand why; you can have a religious belief whatever the shape of the earth, globe or disc.

 

[Zetetica]

There is so much very good evidence that the earth is a sphere, many posted by Zetetica herself. The 'evidence for flatness is contrived and contrarian. Contrived because it attempts to deny observation; Contrarian because its claims are generally contrary to the huge body of science.

All science must be provisional, and we must be ready to modify established understandings in the face of new evidence. Flat earth theories do not come close to challenging science. I am afraid Zetetica's repeated questions have all been satisfactorily answered, many of them long ago. Actually the Ancient Greeks were clear on the subject; Renaissance thinkers were too.

Flat Earth proponents have an agenda to undermine proper rigorous science. I don't understand why; you can have a religious belief whatever the shape of the earth, globe or disc.

Consensus isn't science. This "huge body" (made mostly of mathematical formulas) can be rendered useless with new evidence which goes against it.

String theory for example. Where are all those actions? All that entanglement? Is it occurring in another dimension? If I fire a photon and the app tells me to step right, rather than left, did I just split into another me where I stopped left? This isn't science. This is fiction. It's not measurable. It's not falsifiable.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Consensus isn't science. This "huge body" (made mostly of mathematical formulas) can be rendered useless with new evidence which goes against it.

String theory for example. Where are all those actions? All that entanglement? Is it occurring in another dimension? If I fire a photon and the app tells me to step right, rather than left, did I just split into another me where I stopped left? This isn't science. This is fiction. It's not measurable. It's not falsifiable.

Do you think that there is scientific evidence for a Flat Earth?

 

[Zetetica]

Do you think that there is scientific evidence for a Flat Earth?

Scientific evidence? No. Evidence? Yes. However, seems we're at a pit in the road (more like a gaping void) when it comes to how we read that evidence.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Flat Earth proponents have an agenda to undermine proper rigorous science.

It seems to be mostly related to a particular kind of literal interpretation of the Bible combined with conspiracy theory.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Scientific evidence? No. Evidence? Yes. However, seems we're at a pit in the road (more like a gaping void) where it comes to how we read that evidence.

"Evidence" can be misinterpreted. Scientific evidence much less so. Have you heard of the video "Behind the Curve"? That was a video made of Flat Earthers. The maker was very polite to them and helped them with a proper scientific test that could confirm or refute the Flat Earth belief. All of the Flat Earthers involved thought that the tests were valid and that there was no way that they could fail. And the Flat Earthers did run the tests. Both tests ran falsified their claims.

Also there are spots on the Earth where the curve is visible. How do you deal with those?

 

[Whyayeman]

I think bringing in string theory is an unhelpful distraction.